On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 20:27, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> I'd much, much rather explain that `sys.version[2]` is not correct, and
> solve the "python310" < "python39" problem.
One of the perks of the way PEP 425 deals with this [1] is that ASCII
underscores sort higher than ASCII digits, so:
>>>
On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 07:09, Brian Curtin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:38 PM Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>> And changing the major version number itself is significant breaking
>> change. From the name of the executable (python3 vs python4) hardcoded
>> in Python and shell scripts to a number
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 2:19 PM Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> Since there isn't a way to do this in any fashion I never really thought
> about it. I think most people either set the shebang to the version of Python
> they want it to work with, have pip install the entry point which will also
> set
Since there isn't a way to do this in any fashion I never really thought
about it. I think most people either set the shebang to the version of
Python they want it to work with, have pip install the entry point which
will also set the entry point, or assume that e.g. python3 is new enough to
work.
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 1:25 PM Paul Moore wrote:
[..]
> but I don't know how
> useful it would be in practice - can you give some examples of use
> cases?)
It's hard to give a real life example as "py" doesn't support this,
but I can imagine the following scenario: if I have a script that uses
On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 18:15, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:28 PM Brett Cannon wrote:
> [..]
> >> What is the status of Brett's UNIX Python launcher "py" by the way?
> >
> >
> > You can see the current TODO list at
> > https://crates.io/crates/python-launcher . Basically
and "--list" to fill in the last two low-hanging fruit features,
but at long as you don't need to customize the search mechanism then it's
already working. And BTW it's already compatible with either 3.10 or 4.0.
:)
___
python-committers mailing l
On 9/25/18 9:30 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
*that version* of Python in the documentation, especially when I'm
deprecating APIs or behavior. Right now I'm
For the record, Guido prefer 3.10 to 4.0, before he retired BDFL.
https://python.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/116503-core/subject/rhel/near/124934902
Regards,
--
INADA Naoki
___
python-committers mailing list
python-committers@python.org
Hi,
On 25/09/18 20:30, Yury Selivanov wrote:
What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
[snip]
For the record, we account for the following version tests when
analysing code (on lgtm.com):
sys.version == "3"
sys.version_info > (3,)
sys.version_info[0] == 3
On Sep 25, 2018, at 18:57, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> IMHO It's time to discuss again modifying the "python" program to always
> point to the latest Python version.
This just came up again on linux-sig, but...
> What is the status of Brett's UNIX Python launcher "py" by the way?
...I forgot
Serhiy:
> And changing the major version number itself is significant breaking
change. From the name of the executable (python3 vs python4) hardcoded in
Python
IMHO It's time to discuss again modifying the "python" program to always
point to the latest Python version.
What is the status of
> On Sep 25, 2018, at 6:39 PM, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>
> I think we all have seen code like that; it's a common pattern. So by
> just bumping the version to 4.0 you would break the compatibility for
> some libraries and frameworks. And maybe breaking it is fine if
> there's a very strong
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:33 PM Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would prefer to never ever break the backward compatibility in Python. To
> make it clear I suggest to use 4.0 for the release following Python 3.7.
I think Serhiy made a strong argument that the code like below would
break if
Hi,
I would prefer to never ever break the backward compatibility in Python. To
make it clear I suggest to use 4.0 for the release following Python 3.7.
More and more data confirm me frequently that we already reached the
critical mass to declare that the migration to Python 3 is done.
There
2018-09-25 16:30 GMT-03:00 Yury Selivanov :
> deprecating APIs or behavior. Right now I'm saying "Python 4.0"
> implying that 4.0 will be released right after 3.9.
>
> I've heard multiple opinions on this subject. One of them is that we
> should release 4.0 when we have a major new change, like
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 5:18 PM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018, 12:30 Yury Selivanov wrote:
>>
>> The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
>> *that version* of Python in the documentation, especially when I'm
>> deprecating APIs or behavior. Right now
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018, 12:30 Yury Selivanov wrote:
> The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
> *that version* of Python in the documentation, especially when I'm
> deprecating APIs or behavior. Right now I'm saying "Python 4.0"
> implying that 4.0 will be released
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:38 PM Serhiy Storchaka
wrote:
> 25.09.18 22:40, Barry Warsaw пише:
> > On Sep 25, 2018, at 15:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> >> So my preference would be on 3.10.
> > 3.9 + 0.1 :)
> >
> > Renaming it to Python 4 is fraught with knock-on effects, so I think we
> do reserve
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 4:38 PM Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
[..]
> And changing the major version number itself is significant breaking
> change. From the name of the executable (python3 vs python4) hardcoded
> in Python and shell scripts to a number of third-party scripts that
> contain in the best
25.09.18 22:40, Barry Warsaw пише:
On Sep 25, 2018, at 15:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
So my preference would be on 3.10.
3.9 + 0.1 :)
Renaming it to Python 4 is fraught with knock-on effects, so I think we do
reserve that for major changes. I doubt we’ll ever need for a disruptive
backward
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:30 PM Yury Selivanov wrote:
> What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
One idea I've heard is to switch to calendar versioning after 3.9. So
we'd start with something like "2021" (year) or "2021.06" (year +
month). sys.version_info
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 20:32, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>
> Le 25/09/2018 à 21:30, Yury Selivanov a écrit :
> > What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
> >
> > The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
> > *that version* of Python in the
On Sep 25, 2018, at 15:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> So my preference would be on 3.10.
3.9 + 0.1 :)
Renaming it to Python 4 is fraught with knock-on effects, so I think we do
reserve that for major changes. I doubt we’ll ever need for a disruptive
backward incompatible change *at the
On 25.09.2018 21:30, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
>
> The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
> *that version* of Python in the documentation, especially when I'm
> deprecating APIs or behavior. Right
Le 25/09/2018 à 21:30, Yury Selivanov a écrit :
> What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
>
> The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
> *that version* of Python in the documentation, especially when I'm
> deprecating APIs or behavior.
What's the current plan for what version of Python we release after 3.9?
The reason I'm asking this is because I frequently need to refer to
*that version* of Python in the documentation, especially when I'm
deprecating APIs or behavior. Right now I'm saying "Python 4.0"
implying that 4.0 will
27 matches
Mail list logo
