On Apr 15, 3:50 am, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > En Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:02:38 -0300, Sverker Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > escribió: > > > I tried out py3k on my project,http://guppy-pe.sf.net > > And what happened? > I've seen that your project already supports Python 2.6 so the migration > path to 3.0 should be easy. > > -- > Gabriel Genellina
2.6 was no big deal, It was an annoyance that they had to make 'as' a reserved word. Annoyances were also with 2.4, and 2.5. No big problems, I could make guppy backwards compatible to 2.3. But that seems not to be possible with Python 3.x ... it is a MUCH bigger change. And it would require a fork of the code bases, in C, Guido has written tha or to sprinkle with #ifdefs. Would not happen soon for me. It takes some work anyways. Do you volunteer, Guido van Rossum? :-) It's not exactly easy. Perhaps not very hard anyways. But think of 1000's of such projects. How many do you think there are? I think many. How many do yo think care? I think few. When it has been the fuzz with versions before, then I could have the same code still work with older versions. But now it seems I have to fork TWO codes. It's becoming too much. Think of the time you could write a program in C or even C++ and then it'll work. How do you think eg writers of bash or other unix utilities come along. Do they have to rewrite their code each year? No, it stays. And they can be happy about that, and go on to other things. Why should I have to think about staying compatible with the newest fancy Python all the time? NO -- but the answer may be, they don't care, though the others (C/C++, as they rely on) do. :-( Sverker -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list