On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Eli Stevens (Gmail) <wickedg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> +1 to the question. Why can't it be that way? > > If by "that way" you mean "leave python 2.x behind post 1.6" I'd like > to note that IMO pypy has been under-acknowledged by the wider python > community for a very long time. That's finally starting to change > (pypy production releases, cpython devs devoting resources to make > alternate implementations not second-class citizens, etc.), but by > abandoning the segment of the language with the largest userbase, the > project would go back to niche status again. Yeah, doing so might > position pypy well to become the default python 3 implementation, but > I find it hard to imagine that tacking on another N years until pypy > is a significant percentage of python deployments is going to be good > for the project. > > My $0.02, > Eli
Just to answer some questions: There is no way we're leaving python 2 support for the forseeable future. It's all constructed precisely for the reason so JIT improvements will benefit every interpreter written in RPython, not just a specific one. In either of scenarios presented above, new releases will include both py 3.x and 2.7 as release targets. Cheers, fijal _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
