ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2014-12-05 - 2014-12-12)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open4666 ( +0)
closed 30137 (+42)
total 34803 (+42)
Open issues
So, I'm more than aware of how to write Python 2/3 compatible code. I've
ported 10-20 libraries to Python 3 and write Python 2/3 compatible code at
work. I'm also aware of how much writing 2/3 compatible code makes me hate
Python as a language. It'll be a happy day when one of the two languages
FYI, I've just committed these changes (http://bugs.python.org/issue22919).
There shouldn't be any immediate failures, as the updated projects will still
build with VS 2010, but our Windows developers/buildbots can migrate onto the
later tools as they feel comfortable.
I know there are at
On 2014-12-11, 14:47 GMT, Giampaolo Rodola' wrote:
I still think the only *real* obstacle remains the lack of
important packages such as twisted, gevent and pika which
haven't been ported yet.
And unwise decisions of some vendors (like, unfortunately my
belvoed employer with RHEL-7) not to
Also keep in mind that not all Python libraries are on PyPI.
For non-Python projects with Python bindings (think video players,
OpenCV, systemd, Samba), distribution via PyPI doesn't make much
sense. And since the Python bindings are usually second-class
citizens, the porting doesn't have a high
On Dec 12, 2014, at 08:07 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
If anyone is wondering why their favorite Linux distribution is stuck with
Python 2 – well, I can only speak for Fedora, but nowadays most of what's
left are CPython bindings. No pylint --py3k or 2to3 will help there...
It's true that some of
I have now addressed Nick's comments and backported to Python 2.7.
On Sat Dec 06 2014 at 8:40:24 AM Brett Cannon bcan...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. I'll update the doc probably on Friday.
On Sat Dec 06 2014 at 12:41:54 AM Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 December
On 12/12/2014 1:24 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
However, my point was that just because the core libraries by usage are
*starting* to roll out Python 3 support doesn't mean that things are
easy or convenient yet.
...
I suppose what I'm saying is that the long tail of libraries is far more
valuable
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:24:15AM -0800, Mark Roberts wrote:
So, I'm more than aware of how to write Python 2/3 compatible code. I've
ported 10-20 libraries to Python 3 and write Python 2/3 compatible code at
work. I'm also aware of how much writing 2/3 compatible code makes me hate
Python as
On Dec 12, 2014, at 11:55 PM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:24:15AM -0800, Mark Roberts wrote:
So, I'm more than aware of how to write Python 2/3 compatible code. I've
ported 10-20 libraries to Python 3 and write Python 2/3 compatible code at
work.
On Dec 13, 2014, at 12:29 AM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
On Dec 12, 2014, at 11:55 PM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:24:15AM -0800, Mark Roberts wrote:
So, I'm more than aware of how to write Python 2/3 compatible code. I've
ported
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
So that's basically it, lowest common demoniator programming where it's hard
to
look at the future and see anything but the same (or similar) language subset
that I'm currently using. This is especially frustrating when
On Dec 13, 2014, at 12:40 AM, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
So that's basically it, lowest common demoniator programming where it's hard
to
look at the future and see anything but the same (or similar)
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
First of all, it's essentially the route that Python itself took and the side
effects of that is essentially what is making things less-fun for me to write
Python. Doing the same to the users of the things I write would make
14 matches
Mail list logo
