Nick mentions stackless 2.8 in his updated 3.3 document: http://python-notes.curiousefficiency.org/en/latest/python3/questions_and_answers.html
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:stackless- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Kristján Valur Jónsson > Sent: 7. janúar 2014 09:09 > To: The Stackless Python Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Stackless] stackless 2.8 > > Don't forget VS2010 compatibility. That too is a big ticket. Python sadly > has > to have one windows compiler version per version, it doesn't support both. > People that want to use python 2.x in modern projects are out of luck. > > The vision I have for 2.8 is the following: > > 1) allow future changes for syntax breaking language changes, like nonlocal. > Exception semantics could be there too but that's a lot of work. > 2) Just add in non-breaking features like yield from > 3) Allow backports of stdlib features from 3.x, such as weakref.WeakMethod > to name one > 4) Allow fixes to standardlib that might break existing undefined semantics, > such as changing the implementation of some stuff in httplib. (2.7 doesn't > accept _proper_ fixes, just _patches_ on top of kludges) > 5) Windows: Default compiler support is 2010. Heck, we could even go with > 2013 just for laughs! How would that sound? Dual support for 2010 and 2013 > 6) Platform support: Let's add android cross compilation features in by > default! Android is on the move and python still isn't there. > > K > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:stackless- > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Christian Tismer > > Sent: 7. janúar 2014 01:52 > > To: The Stackless Python Mailing List > > Subject: Re: [Stackless] stackless 2.8 > > > > On 07.01.14 02:23, Richard Tew wrote: > > > No, I just want to be clear on what everyone expects to get out of it. > > > For me, as I understand it, it's 2.x with whatever whomever wishes > > > to backport from 3.x, included. Therefore, to some degree it would > > > also serve (with no extra work than any of us plans) as an > > > intermediate point that lessens effort in migrating to 3.x by being > > > somewhere in between. > > > > > > I think that renaming the executable is what you should do. People > > > can alias to 'python' as they please. > > > > Very much agreed! > > That is what I'm going to do consequently, and quite probably this is > > the best to do in the future, too! > > > > But let us try it with 2.8 first. If people like what they get, then > > we should consider to extend the renaming. > > > > all the best -- Chris > > > > -- > > Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:[email protected]> > > Software Consulting : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's > > Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121 : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/ > > 14482 Potsdam : PGP key -> http://pgp.uni-mainz.de > > phone +49 173 24 18 776 fax +49 (30) 700143-0023 > > PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 > > whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Stackless mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless > > > > _______________________________________________ > Stackless mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless _______________________________________________ Stackless mailing list [email protected] http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
