Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> On May 17, 2008, at 12:28 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> My point is that if they're not required to do anything to be ready  
>> for Py3, why force them to do so? If I want to use someone else's  
>> (Py2) module in Py3, I should be able to just compile their C file. I  
>> think it is extremely likely that it will just work out of the box-- 
>> Py3 is not that incompatible.
> 
> This whole discussion sounds a lot like bike shedding to me. I say it would be
> better if people fixed their code instead of doing guess-work, and I have come
> up with a couple of examples where current Cython code breaks under the
> semantics you propose. You say it would make more users happy if we adopted
> these semantics.

+1. This discussion is getting silly. Everything has been reiterated 
many times over by now; and it is clear that it's not a matter about 
understanding one another better, it's a matter of disagreeing.

Let me add: It seems like a good idea with a forced break in the 
discussion at this point, and if Stefan's suggestion with waiting for 
the real world isn't heeded then a nice summary on the wiki listing pros 
and cons and trying to break up the question into smaller pieces in a 
more systematic way should be written before starting again.

(For new users: Bikeshedding can be read about here: 
http://green.bikeshed.com/)

-- 
Dag Sverre

_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to