Albert Hopkins <mar...@letterboxes.org> writes: > On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 10:08 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > > Yes, it would be nice if the ‘time’, ‘datetime’, and ‘calendar’ > > modules were all much more unified and consumed a common set of > > primitive date+time types. It's a wart, and fixing it would > > (unfortunately) probably require backward-incompatible API changes. > > But, supposedly, that's why we had Python3.
Fixing ‘time’, ‘datetime’, and ‘calendar’ was the reason for Python 3? No, it wasn't. Or perhaps you mean that any backward-incompatible change was a reason to have Python 3? Even more firmly no. The extent of changes was severely limited to make the transition from Python 2 to Python 3 as painless as feasible, while still meeting the goals of Python 3. -- \ “Odious ideas are not entitled to hide from criticism behind | `\ the human shield of their believers' feelings.” —Richard | _o__) Stallman | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
