>From my understanding, it's easiest to do this if we don't support Python 3.2, and even easier if we don't support Python 2.6 (but we should continue to support 2.6 for a while).
I am -1 to this, just because we already have 2to3 working, and so we should not waste our time fixing what isn't broken. Aaron Meurer On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Ondřej Čertík <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > After we drop Python 2.5 support, I wonder if it is possible to > support both Python 2 and 3 in a single code base. > > It seems that this is what actually other projects use. See this PR > that introduced this change to scipy: > > https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/397 > > and follow the discussion, e.g. a link to IPython discussion there > (that suggests to slowly start turning off individual fixers that the > 2to3 tool does, until it is not needed anymore). > > > If we choose not to go this way, then you can join a discussion about > how to best implement the 2to3 translation in this PR: > > https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/2262 > > Ondrej > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sympy" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
