On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:24:31 +0100, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 11:24:19 -0500
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >
> > I really do think that to the extent that you can do that kind of thing, you
> > may end up with essentially Python 3 support without even realizing it. :)
>
> That's unli
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 11:24:19 -0500
Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> I really do think that to the extent that you can do that kind of thing, you
> may end up with essentially Python 3 support without even realizing it. :)
That's unlikely. Twisted processes bytes data a lot, and the bytes
indexing behaviou
On Mar 01, 2012, at 04:42 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>Well, to be honest, "making good progress" currently means "bored and
>not progressing at all" :-) But that's not due to the strategy I
>adopted, only to the sheer amount of small changes needed, and lack of
>immediate motivation to continue thi
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> I also don't agree with the claim that a py3 version using 2to3 is a
> "second class citizen". You need to adopt the Python 2 code to Python
> 3 in that case too, and none of the overrules the other.
That's a fair point. Then of course *both* versions do not use their ful
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 16:31:14 +0100
Stefan Krah wrote:
>
> As an example for a pretty large project, it looks like Antoine is making
> good progress with Twisted:
>
> https://bitbucket.org/pitrou/t3k/wiki/Home
Well, to be honest, "making good progress" currently means "bored and
not progressing a
Merlijn van Deen wrote:
> Another cause for this is the painful merging in most version control systems.
> I'm guessing you all know the pain of 'svn merge' - and there are a lot of
> projects still using SVN or even CVS.
>
> As such, you need to impose the discipline to always apply changes to bo
I also don't agree with the claim that a py3 version using 2to3 is a
"second class citizen". You need to adopt the Python 2 code to Python
3 in that case too, and none of the overrules the other.
//Lennart
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.or
On 1 March 2012 12:11, Stefan Krah wrote:
> Advantages of separate branches:
>
Even though I agree on most of your points, I disagree with
2) Neither version is a second class citizen.
In my experience, this is only true if you have a very strict discipline,
or if both branches are used a lo
Brett Cannon wrote:
> Changes to http://docs.python.org/howto/pyporting.html are welcome. I tried to
> make sure it exposed all possibilities with tips on how to support as far back
> as Python 2.5.
I'd like to add a section that highlights the advantages of separate
branches. Starting perhaps wi
>
> FWIW, I agree that much of the rhetoric in the current version of PEP
> 414 is excessive.
>
> Armin has given me permission to create an updated version of PEP 414
> and toning down the hyperbole (or removing it entirely in cases where
> it's irrelevant to the final decision) is one of the t
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
>
> > One thing that the PEP will certainly achieve is to spread the myth that
> > you cannot port to Python 3 if you also want to support Python 2.5. That's
> > because people will accept the "single sourc
mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
> One thing that the PEP will certainly achieve is to spread the myth that
> you cannot port to Python 3 if you also want to support Python 2.5. That's
> because people will accept the "single source" approach as the one right way,
> and will accept that this only wo
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:51, Vinay Sajip wrote:
> Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
>
>> Changes to http://docs.python.org/howto/pyporting.html are welcome. I tried
>> to
>> make sure it exposed all possibilities with tips on how to support as far
>> back
>> as Python 2.5.
>
> Right, will take
Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
> Changes to http://docs.python.org/howto/pyporting.html are welcome. I tried to
> make sure it exposed all possibilities with tips on how to support as far back
> as Python 2.5.
Right, will take a look. FYI a Google search for "python 3 porting guide" shows
the
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:07, Vinay Sajip wrote:
> v.loewis.de> writes:
>
> > One thing that the PEP will certainly achieve is to spread the myth that
> > you cannot port to Python 3 if you also want to support Python 2.5.
> That's
> > because people will accept the "single source" approach as
v.loewis.de> writes:
> One thing that the PEP will certainly achieve is to spread the myth that
> you cannot port to Python 3 if you also want to support Python 2.5. That's
> because people will accept the "single source" approach as the one right
> way, and will accept that this only works well
If PEP 414 helps some projects migrate to Python 3, great.
But I really hope we as a community don't perpetuate the myth that you cannot
port to Python 3 without this, and I hope that we spend as much effort on
educating other Python developers on how to port to Python 3 *right now*
supporting Py
On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:23 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>Well, when the code is committed I will update the porting HOWTO and push
>the __future__ imports first since they cover more versions of Python (i.e.
>Python 3.2). But I will mention the options that skip the __future__
>imports for those that ch
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 09:53, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2012, at 08:41 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
>
> >Hmm. It seems to me that this argument implies that PEP 414 is just
> >as likely to *slow down* adoption of Python3 as it is to speed it up,
> >since if this issue is as big a barrier a
On Feb 28, 2012, at 08:41 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
>Hmm. It seems to me that this argument implies that PEP 414 is just
>as likely to *slow down* adoption of Python3 as it is to speed it up,
>since if this issue is as big a barrier as indicated, many potential
>porters may choose to wait until
20 matches
Mail list logo
