On Thursday 11 January 2007 05:13, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> It is my strong preference that we not go down this path.
> Instead, the 2.6 vs 3.0 difference analysis should go in an
> external lint utility.
I don't see how an external utility can possibly catch everything
that's going to break -
On Jan 11, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> I'm plan to try and make the transition as painless as possible.
I'm glad to hear it.
> The goal is to have a first alpha sometime this year - there is
> absolutely no chance of a 3.0 final this year.
Duly noted.
>> Basically: my plea is: ple
On Friday 12 January 2007 06:09, James Y Knight wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2007, at 6:46 PM, Benji York wrote:
> > Paul Moore wrote:
> >> How many other projects/packages anticipate *not* migrating to
> >> Py3K, I wonder?
> >
> > I certainly can't speak for the project as a whole, but I
> > anticipate a f
On 1/11/07, Ron Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Jewett wrote:
> > Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> >
> >> Also, I'm wondering if the desire for 2.6 warnings is based on the notion
> >> that
> >> it will be possible to get large tools to work under both Py2.x and Py3.x.
> >
> > I had certainly assu
Armin Rigo schrieb:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 11:10:10PM +, Paul Moore wrote:
>> How many other projects/packages anticipate *not* migrating to Py3K, I
>> wonder?
>
> FWIW: Psyco.
What will PyPy do? It will certainly support compiling Py3k code at some point,
but will the codeb
Hi Paul,
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 11:10:10PM +, Paul Moore wrote:
> How many other projects/packages anticipate *not* migrating to Py3K, I wonder?
FWIW: Psyco.
Armin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/l
Mike Orr wrote:
[...]
>
> How did Perl 4 and Perl 5 handle the situation? I basically waited
> 2-3 years after Perl 5 came out, then started programming the new way.
> If it mattered (it didn't), I would have tied my applications
> specifically to Perl 4.
>
It's probably a good job you aren't h
On 1/11/07, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If the goal is really to have Py 3.0 be released later this year,
3.0 alpha is scheduled for this year. 3.0 final is not scheduled till
next year, and of course another level of tweaks will have to be made
after it's been in the Real World f
James Y Knight schrieb:
> If Python 3.0 was simply a release which removed deprecated features,
> there would clearly be no issue. I would update my code in advance of
> the 3.0 release to not use any of those features being removed, and
> I'm all set. But that's not what I'm hearing. Python
On Jan 10, 2007, at 6:46 PM, Benji York wrote:
> Paul Moore wrote:
>> How many other projects/packages anticipate *not* migrating to
>> Py3K, I wonder?
>
> I certainly can't speak for the project as a whole, but I anticipate a
> fair bit of work to port Zope 3 (100+ KLOC) to Python 3.0.
I (anot
On 10 Jan, 11:10 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 10/01/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I've been assuming for some time that the only hope for Py3k compatibility
>>within Twisted would be using PyPy as a translation layer.
>Does this ring as many warning bells for me as it does
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Also, I'm wondering if the desire for 2.6 warnings is based on the notion that
> it will be possible to get large tools to work under both Py2.x and Py3.x.
I had certainly assumed it would be possible.
In fact, I had assumed that the 2->3 translator would have a mode
w
12 matches
Mail list logo
