On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 08:00:06 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> > wrote: >> On 2013-04-08, Walter Hurry <walterhu...@lavabit.com> wrote: >>> The fact of Python enforcing it (or all tabs; a poor second choice) >>> is *a good thing*, easy and natural IMHO. No need for "end if" or "end >>> loop" or "fi". One wonders whether OP is simply trolling. >> >> If he was trolling, he certainly deserves a prize. > > I don't think he was trolling. It was a classic-model rant: "I upgraded > my dependency to a newer version and all my stuff broke". > Commonly provokes anger, largely because many such upgrades do NOT break > stuff (eg if I were to switch from gcc 4.5 to gcc 4.7 right now, > I doubt anything would break, and my code would be able to use the new > iterator syntax in c++11 - pity 4.7 isn't packaged for Debian Squeeze). > The OP upgraded across an openly-non-backward-compatible boundary, and > got angry over one particular aspect of backward compat that wasn't > there.
But wouldn't it have been easier simply to do do a quick sed or whatever rather than to spend hours here arguing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
