On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Lennart Regebro <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 20:00, cool-RR <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm not sure we're on the same page here. My intention is that Python 2.x > > users will use only `garlicsim`, and Python 3.x users will use only > > `garlicsim_py3`. > > Why would you want that? Reasonably it should be called garlicsim in both > cases. > If not you make it needlessly painful to move from Python 2 to Python 3. > As P.J. said, the package will have the same name `garlicsim` in both versions, but the name on PyPI of the Python 3 version will be `garlicsim_py3`. > Also, even though you want your code to be clean, the amount of > compatibility hacks to support both Python 2 and Python 3 you would > need is probably not very large if you use Distribute and it's 2to3 > support. > Funny you mention it just now. Python 3 is just giving me an obscure problem that I (a) don't know how to solve and (b) seriously doubt any 2to3 algorithm will handle. Here it is: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2930792/pickling-an-unbound-method-in-python-3 Ram.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
