S
Steve Holden
I haven't corresponded specifically with Fredrik about this, bit I getAahz said:For me, it works the other way around, but I can see how you perceive it
that way.
Okay, it wasn't clear in your original post that you're still stuck with
1.5.2. That makes a huge difference in the convenience of newer
features.
the impression he *chooses* to continue to produce 1.5.2-compatible
products. I for one, having suffered at the hands of modules that
*claim* 1.5.2 compatibility (and then screw you by using dict()!),
appreciate the time he takes to do so.
A summary of how to maintain such compatibility might make Python apps
more accessible - how many of us can say that our code would run on a
Red Hat 7 system any more? The sad thing is that it's often fairly
trivial changes that remove backwards-compatibility.Well, I guess we have to accept that not every change to the language is
going to be well-thought-out and completely desirable.
While I'm in complete agreement about the "".join() construct on the
basis of looks, I have come to appreciate the fact that I *never* mess up
the order of arguments any more.
Personally that's one of the changes I managed to take in my stride, and
I've never really felt it was a biggie. Maybe my code is just so ugly
that a little extra ugliness isn't noticeable?
horses-for-courses-ly y'rs - steve