On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Eric Smith <e...@trueblade.com> wrote: > Tarek Ziadé wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> wrote: >>> >>> Tarek Ziadé wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM, M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The micro-language should provide a limited number of >>>>>>> variables to use on the conditions: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> python_version = sys.version >>>>>>> sys_platform = sys.platform >>>>>> >>>>>> If we adopt such a micro-language (I'm reserving judgment until I've >>>>>> had more time to read the relevant PEPs carefully), I'd rather see the >>>>>> names match what's in the Python runtime more closely, probably only >>>>>> avoiding the call syntax. >>>>> >>>>> We could do that as well, yes. >>>> >>>> +1 on close names + no call syntax >>>> >>>> but, notice that "python_version" here is: "%s.%s" % >>>> sys.version_info[0], sys.version_info[1] >>>> >>>> thats why we came up with that name, to disinguish it from sys.version >>>> (that contains more stuff) >>> >>> I think we do need the full version here, so perhaps using >>> sys.version.split()[0] would be better or simply the full >>> version string and then have conditions use >=, <=, <, > >>> only (ie. not =, since that would likely never match). >> >> Notice that for the comparisons >, < to work, that requires more than >> string >> comparisons in case we provide the ability to work with rc versions, >> because: >> >>>>> '2.6.3rc4' < '2.6.3' >> >> False >> >> We said earlier that we could use sys.hexversion to handle this, but >> otherwise, >> at least for the Python version, we can use the StrictVersion() class >> from Distutils, >> >> *But* we ended up thinking that it would be better for the first version >> to keep >> just "==", "!=", "in" and "not in" operators and a MAJOR.MINOR string. >> >> These are enough just to compare strings, on a limited number of >> versions for Python. > > I thought the plan was to stick with major.minor and "==", "!=", "in" and > "not in" until PEP 386 was accepted, then switch over to having all versions > (including Python's) be some sort of Version object, at which point we can > have richer version comparisons, with all of the existing uses being > compatible.
Yes that's the plan too. PEP 345 is not updated yet, but that is clearly stated in PEP 386. Tarek _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
