Re:Python adopts a 12-month release cycle
by eesmith on Friday November 01, 2019 @10:33PM
(#21425537)
You're right; code could have used 'async = 1' before.
Another technique is:
try:
import test_module
except SyntaxError:
...
except NameError:
...
Nonetheless, my point wasn't really to show that eval() was essential, only that any language which supports eval() will have these problems.Is C a permissive language?
C99 added support for BCPL-style comments, causing
int a = 1 //* */ 2
;
to give different behavior. C11 removed gets(), and broke code which just happened to define its own aligned_alloc() while also #including stdlib.h.
Re:Python adopts a 12-month release cycle
by 3JPLW on Saturday November 02, 2019 @02:26AM
(#21426207)
Those releases are 12 years apart and are definitely not using SemVer.
I’m not at all against breaking changes, nor am I trying to litigate which languages are harder to extend non-breakingly, I’m just surprised that there’s no compatibility guarantees between 3.x releases.
Re:Python adopts a 12-month release cycle
by eesmith on Saturday November 02, 2019 @09:42AM
(#21427652)
I meant that C example to get some insight on what you mean by "permissive language" and why that was important to the topic.
What language makes the compatibility guarantee you're looking for? I can't think of enough such languages to warrant being surprised about Python's behavior.
It's just a challenge with permissive languages that expose as much of their internals as Python, but a practical view could still be taken — for example, it could be possible to run all the test-suites of packages in the PyPI on a new version to test for breakages.