A quick overall response: I know that a lot of what I am talking about *is
possible* using RPython. That is one reason why I am starting where I am.
That doesn't necessarily make it easy (or as easy as it could be).
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Ronan Lamy wrote:
> Why Py3?: I like Py3 be
Le 16/04/15 14:55, VanL a écrit :
Hi Maciej,
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski mailto:fij...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Van.
First of all I'm really sorry if we ever gave an impression that
working on porting RPython to Python 3 would not be welcomed and I
would li
Just bundled up a few of the more mechanical changes into a PR and sent it
upstream.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 8:55 AM, VanL wrote:
> Hi Maciej,
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Van.
>>
>> First of all I'm really sorry if we ever gave an impression that
>>
Hi Maciej,
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski
wrote:
> Hi Van.
>
> First of all I'm really sorry if we ever gave an impression that
> working on porting RPython to Python 3 would not be welcomed and I
> would like to strongly disagree with that.
>
> What we did say (or wanted to
2015-04-16 14:02 GMT+02:00 Maciej Fijalkowski :
> > I think *some* conversion should be allowed, for example when the
> unicode is
> > a constant.
> > (maybe with a SomeAsciiString annotation)
> > Otherwise, do we need to rewrite all calls like `space.call_method(w_x,
> > "split")`?
> >
> > Anothe
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Ronan Lamy wrote:
> 4. At some point in the future, I plan on reworking the rpython
>> toolchain in various ways - use python 3 function and type annotations
>> so as to make the flow of types be easier to see, fully split out the
>> rpython and non-rpython bit
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc
wrote:
>
> 2015-04-16 10:48 GMT+02:00 Maciej Fijalkowski :
>>
>> >
>> > 2. I am initially doing this work in a way that maintains 2/3
>> > compatibility
>> > - my check before each major commit is whether I can still build pypy
>> > using
>> >
2015-04-16 10:48 GMT+02:00 Maciej Fijalkowski :
> >
> > 2. I am initially doing this work in a way that maintains 2/3
> compatibility
> > - my check before each major commit is whether I can still build pypy
> using
> > pypy2. Would the pypy devs be willing to make building pypy be 2.7+ only?
> >
Hi Van.
First of all I'm really sorry if we ever gave an impression that
working on porting RPython to Python 3 would not be welcomed and I
would like to strongly disagree with that.
What we did say (or wanted to say) is that we're unlikely to put a
significant effort into doing the porting ourse
>
>
> pypy is already 2.7 only. It's only rpython that still supports 2.6,
> probably (we have no CI for 2.6, so it's not even clear that it really
> works). I'm +1 for dropping it.
RPython is also 2.7 only, we dropped the 2.6 support a while ago
___
pyp
10 matches
Mail list logo
