On 9 June 2016 at 16:43, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote:
> That's not what I'm saying at all (nor what I think Nick is saying); more
> tooling to ease the transition is always welcomed.
What Brett said is mostly accurate for me, except with one slight
caveat: I've been explicitly trying to nudge you towards making the
*existing tools better*, rather than introducing new tools. With
modernize and futurize we have a fairly clear trade-off ("Do you want
your code to look more like Python 2 or more like Python 3?"), and
things like "pylint --py3k" and the static analyzers are purely
additive to the migration process (so folks can take them or leave
them), but alternate interpreter builds and new converters have really
high barriers to adoption.
More -3 warnings in Python 2.7 are definitely welcome (since those can
pick up runtime behaviors that the static analysers miss), and if
there are things the existing code converters and static analysers
*could* detect but don't, that's a fruitful avenue for improvement as
well.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________
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
