On Wed, 28 May 2014 15:26:38 -0700 Glyph Lefkowitz <gl...@twistedmatrix.com> wrote: > Backport 'yield from' to allow people to use Tulip and Tulip-compatible code, > and to facilitate the development of Tulip-friendly libraries and a Tulip > ecosystem. A robust Tulip ecosystem requires the participation of people who > are not yet using Python 3.
I was wondering whether you were trolling or not on this one. >From a quality assurance point of view, adding major features to a bugfix branch is extremely destructive, so I'm strongly -1 on it. > Get rid of 2to3. Particularly, of any discussion of using 2to3 in the > documentation. More than one very experienced, well-known Python developer > in this discussion has told me that they thought 2to3 was the blessed way to > port their code, and it's no surprise that they think so, given that the > first technique <https://docs.python.org/3/howto/pyporting.html> mentions is > still 2to3. 2to3 is certainly fine if you are porting to 3.x without looking to keep your code 2.x-compatible. Until there's a better alternative, of course. So what we should do is better explain the choice (if you want to port your code to 3.x, use 2to3; if you want to maintain dual-compatible code, use six or something similar). Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
