11.03.2011 09:37, Rüdiger Kessel kirjoitti:
I have done no porting at all, but I usually end up programming in a
macro language in all my projects in the past. I usually do not write
the code in the language it will be compiled at the end. What is the
can of worms you are talking about? In my experience have 2 code basis
are a can of worms.
Which is why I'm suggesting a SINGLE code base.
Again, I do not have enough "Python" experience to judge this things.
But I am looking for a powerful pre-processor for Python because I am
starting to see the need for it in "my" projects.
2011/3/11 Alex Grönholm <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
11.03.2011 09:20, Rüdiger Kessel kirjoitti:
This looks like a perfect pre-processor task to me. Define a
macro "EXCEPT(a,b)" that will be converted to "except a,b" or to
"except a as b". Defining the macros might be a bit of work, but
then you could write one common source where both versions can be
derived from. The only disadvantage is that you need to code
everything in macros. That is the price of maintaining only one
source code base.
No, it isn't. Nobody uses preprocessors for this, unless you count
2to3 as one. The correct way to do it in a way that works for both
2.x and 3.x is:
try:
...
except Exception:
exc = sys.exc_info()[1]
....
Preprocessors (other than 2to3) would open a whole new can of
worms, which is totally unnecessary here. Trust me -- in all
likelihood, I've done a lot more porting than you have :)
This is what I mean with "local" changes. If you can achieve the
same thing in 2.x and in 3k by changing segments of a few lines
each then you can use a pre-processor. But that would not lead to
the need of moving things between modules, doesn't it?
2011/3/10 Alex Grönholm <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
11.03.2011 03:32, Rüdiger Kessel kirjoitti:
I read that one, but I got the impression that changes are
all local. Why would one want to move things between modules
just because it uses py3k syntax?
It looks to me that basically the same structures should
work for both. Maybe I am missing something fundamental here.
The syntax changes are fairly radical. For example, how would
you catch named exceptions (and assign to a variable) in a
way that works for both 3.x and 2.x? There is an ugly but
workable way, but I'd just like to check if you've understood
the problem.
2011/3/10 Alex Grönholm <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
11.03.2011 03:17, Rüdiger Kessel kirjoitti:
Sorry for being stupid. I did not see Python py3k yet.
I saw no need. I use Python because it is available
everywhere.
I thought that py3k was just some syntactical different
dialect. But obviously it is more. Does it have
completely new data types and does it not support the
types from 2.x any more?
This should answer most of your questions:
http://docs.python.org/release/3.0.1/whatsnew/3.0.html
Rüdiger
2011/3/10 Alex Grönholm <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
10.03.2011 18:27, Tomer Filiba kirjoitti:
no, it's not really possible, because many types
were moved between modules, or completely dropped.
also, the object model has changed a little, and
since netrefs play with the low-level stuff, they
have to be adapted.
all in all, the syntax part is the least of our
concerns.
I've done quite a bit of py3k porting work myself,
so could you be a little more specific? Maybe I can
address those concerns.
-tomer
An NCO and a Gentleman
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 00:41, Rüdiger Kessel
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Sorry for asking this stupid question, but is
there any good python preprocessor out there
that can support the version problem so that
the code can look nice, but still comes from a
common code base?
Ruediger
2011/3/9 Jorge Maroto <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Tomer
Filiba <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> yeah, i had the feeling someone would
sneak in redhat and
> their nonexistent releases...
> you know, being stuck with software from
2004 in 2011... how come people PAY
> money for that "support"?
IMHO they just pay to have someone to put
the blame on. :).
