On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 3:00 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > Am 02.03.2011 23:36, schrieb Jérôme Radix: >> No, I don't do it now. But taking like granted the fact that 2.x python >> will be dead in 5 years and that /usr/bin/python will point to python3 >> is, imho, a little too optimistic. > > I don't think Steven said, or assumed, a scope of 5 years - more like > a scope of 30 years. In 30 years, Python 2 will surely be dead (as > will likely be Python 3). > > The defensive programming you promote is likely to fail. Many Python 2 > scripts are syntactically invalid when interpreted as Python 3, so a > version test won't even be executed. > > With separate python2 and python3 executables, people can have scripts > depend on the right binary. > > In interactive mode, I would like to use /usr/bin/python be the > "current" Python binary always (even when Python 4.6 comes along). > Python will, interactively, greet me with its version number, and I > can adjust. So the idea of /usr/bin/python being reserved for Python 2 > strikes me as inconvenient.
+1 on all that. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
