[Python-Dev] The bytes type (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Fri Jan 12 20:00:28 CET 2007

On 1/12/07, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote:

[A.M. Kuchling] > 2.6 wouldn't go changing existing APIs to begin requiring or returning > the bytes type[*], of course, but extensions and new modules might use > it.

The premise is dubious. If I am currently maintaining a module, why would I switch to a bytes type and forgo compatibility with Py2.5 and prior? I might as well just convert it to run on Py3.0 and leave my Py2.5 code as-is for people who want to run 2.x. If I'm writing a new module, what's the point of twisting myself into knots to get it to run on both Py2.6 and Py3.0? That just makes coding harder (by limiting me to the intersection of the feature sets). I think we should draw a line in the sand and resolve not to garbage-up Py2.6. The whole Py3.0 project is about eliminating cruft and being free of the bonds of backwards compatibility. Adding non-essential cruft to Py2.6 goes against that philosophy.

I'm not so sure, since 2.6 will likely be out and stable long before 3.0 gains much of a foothold. I believe the experiences with a similar approach in the Zope world for the 2->3 transition was overall a favorable one.

However, I'd be loathe to make any compromises in 3.0 in order to make life easier for 2.6. The burden must be on 2.6 (and 2.7-2.9), and if it's just impossible, that's too bad for them.

-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list