Hello Brandon,

Thanks for doing this work, spyder is one of my favourite tools and I 
wouldn't think about moving to python 3 without it!

I was just checking out the guidelines for porting to python 3: 
http://wiki.python.org/moin/PortingPythonToPy3k

It seems that you are taking approach 3 from this document - creating a 
separate code branch for python 3 code. However, I imagine that this would 
add a significant development burden to spyder, as any change would have to 
be made to both versions. 

In principal approach 1 looks really appealing - there is one code base in 
python 2.x, which is written in such a way that it will generate correct 
3.x code when run through the 2to3 tool. So the idea would be to modify the 
python 2.x code until it converts nicely. I was just wondering if there are 
any show-stoppers which prevent you from taking this approach. I don't want 
to tell you what to do, but I guess it's worth thinking this over before 
you commit too much time and effort.

cheers
David

On Monday, 30 April 2012 12:12:01 UTC+10, Brandon Parsons wrote:
>
> OK. So, I cloned a copy locally, ran 2to3, and started making fixes 
> for the remaining stuff that prevented it from even running. At this 
> point, 'light' mode seems to work OK, but there are occasional crashes 
> in the full mode, sometimes behavior depends on whether --chowconsole 
> or -d are used, as to how long it runs. 
>
> Several of the changes made after running 2to3 can probably just be 
> added to the trunk, regardless of Python version, and would help for 
> any future porting effort. Others may prove trickier and might require 
> the addition of some code to have slightly different behavior in 
> Python 2 vs Python 3. At any rate, one thing I wanted to ask was what 
> the minimum Python version Spyder supports (or will support in coming 
> releases), as that may have an impact on how some of the 
> incompatibilities would be dealt with. 
>
> I didn't do any work to add the automatic running of 2to3 in the build/ 
> install process. I ran 2to3 on a branch, committed that, and then 
> worked from there to get it running. Hopefully most of the commits 
> after that can be added back into the mainline version, and enable 
> adding 2to3 to part of the build process, so as to allow Python3 work 
> without really hindering present development. 
>
> Should I make a clone in the google code space, and push commits there 
> for review/inclusion into mainline so that we can get closer to Python 
> 3 support with 2to3? 
>
> Some of the changes I made were with regard to strings (legacy vs. 
> unicode), and they may not be entirely correct.  This is one aspect 
> that will probably take some more thought to enable Python 3 using 
> 2to3 as part of the build process. 
>
> Oh, one other thing. I need to check if any crashing problems stem 
> from sys.std(err|in|out) usage when using pythonw on Windows. I found 
> some similar issues with IPython on Windows with Python 3. sys.std* 
> are None when using pythonw from Python 3, so anything that counts on 
> them being something else (builtins are fine, since they silently 
> ignore those streams when they're none).  Details at 
> http://bugs.python.org/issue1415, 
> if interested. 
>
> Brandon 
>
> On Apr 16, 6:39 am, Pierre Raybaut <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > AFAIK, this is not a difficult job and there is no sticking point: 
> > it's just a question of time. 
> > 
> > So basically, this is 'only' a matter of: 
> > 1. running 2to3 on all sources 
> > 2. doing all the changes that the 2to3 tool can't do automatically 
> > 3. testing, testing, testing... 
> > 
> > -Pierre 
> > 
> > Le 16 avril 2012 12:04, Joes Staal <[email protected]> a écrit : 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > What would it take to support python 3? Numpy, scipy and  matplotlib 
> all can 
> > > use python 3. Is it 'only' running 2to3 on all sources or are there 
> more 
> > > intrinsic difficulties for getting spyder running with python 3? 
> > 
> > > Cheers, 
> > 
> > > Joes 
> > 
> > > -- 
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups 
> > > "spyder" group. 
> > > To view this discussion on the web visit 
> > >https://groups.google.com/d/msg/spyderlib/-/fqID4ngGUecJ. 
> > 
> > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > > [email protected]. 
> > > For more options, visit this group at 
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"spyder" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/spyderlib/-/rBmAj4ziwg8J.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.

Reply via email to