On Jul 3, 8:33 am, William Stein <[email protected]> wrote: > Sage can't switch to Python 3 until every single Python package in > Sage is ported to Python 3. > This is far from done. It's possible that for some packages, nobody > is even working on doing a port. In such cases, our only hope is to > either do the port ourselves or remove the package from Sage, which > may both be incredibly difficult. I've heard Twisted may be an > example of such a package, but there might be others. Even numpy > hasn't been ported to Python 3 yet, though at least there work is > rumored to be in progress.
Of course, you understand these issues better than I do. I didn't even consider that Sage has so many third-party libraries at the Python level. So yeah, I can see that it could take a long time to do such a conversion. Even so, I would suggest a more developed policy than just that you can't do it right now. Certainly at first glance, Python 3 looks a really good idea. Maybe at second glance, the conversion cost is very high for many projects and you could estimate that it will take many years for the world to switch. (But note that the same was true of a really great editor called NEdit and Unicode, and the result in the long run was that it hurt NEdit a lot.) In any case the all-or-nothing answer cannot be completely true. After all, you have interface support for packages written entirely in C or whatever other language. So how could it be that if you were in Python 3, then Python 2.* would be the one language that you can't support at all? What would you do if you wanted to support a Python 3 package? -- 00000 Greg Kuperberg 01234 Professor of Mathematics 02413 University of California, Davis 03142 http://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~greg/ 04321 [email protected] -- To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org
