Author mrabarnett
Recipients akitada, akoumjian, alex, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, davide.rizzo, eric.snow, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, jacques, jaylogan, jhalcrow, jimjjewett, loewis, mark, moreati, mrabarnett, nneonneo, pitrou, r.david.murray, ronnix, rsc, sjmachin, steven.daprano, stiv, timehorse, vbr, zdwiel
Date 2011-09-02.17:40:21
SpamBayes Score 2.71674e-07
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1314985222.1.0.38352557658.issue2636@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
The least disruptive change would be to have a NEW flag for the new behaviour, as at present, and an OLD flag for the old behaviour.

Currently the default is old behaviour, but in the future it will be new behaviour.

The differences would be:

Old behaviour                   : New behaviour
-------------                     -------------
Global inline flags             : Positional inline flags
Can't split on zero-width match : Can split on zero-width match
Simple sets                     : Nested sets and set operations

The only change would be that nested sets wouldn't be supported in the old behaviour.

There are also additional escape sequences, eg \X is no longer treated as "X", but as they look like escape sequences you really shouldn't be relying on that. (It's similar to writing Windows paths in non-raw string literals: "\T" == "\\T", but "\t" == chr(9).)
History
Date User Action Args
2011-09-02 17:40:22mrabarnettsetrecipients: + mrabarnett, loewis, georg.brandl, gregory.p.smith, jimjjewett, sjmachin, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, pitrou, nneonneo, giampaolo.rodola, rsc, timehorse, mark, vbr, ezio.melotti, jaylogan, akitada, moreati, steven.daprano, alex, r.david.murray, jacques, zdwiel, jhalcrow, stiv, davide.rizzo, ronnix, eric.snow, akoumjian
2011-09-02 17:40:22mrabarnettsetmessageid: <1314985222.1.0.38352557658.issue2636@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2011-09-02 17:40:21mrabarnettlinkissue2636 messages
2011-09-02 17:40:21mrabarnettcreate