Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Wichert Akkerman <wich...@wiggy.net> wrote:
>> We could also say that we will clean up the API when we move to Python
>> 3. That is a natural breaking point anyway, so it will not any extra
>> pain for users of the ZCA.
> 
> Except that is precisely what the Python developers have asked
> everyone not to do. So far the story is that the upgrade to Python 3
> can be done largely automatic and a codebase for 2.x and 3.x can be
> maintained automatically and kept in sync.

That's a nice theory, but experience suggests it'll be a right mess. Is 
anyone doing this successfully on a project of a comparable size to 
Zope? Or Plone? It sounds like fantasy to me. Why? Because if the 
compatibility really was that "mechanical" there would probably be a way 
to run Python 2 code in Python 3 - and there isn't.

> Once you introduce semantic instead of syntactic differences outside
> Python 3 itself into the whole mix, it gets virtually impossible to
> maintain a codebase that works on both 2.x and 3.x.

This feels like we're trying to solve a different problem.

> So while the Python 3 uptake is still slow, I think we shouldn't add
> more roadblocks onto that path.

A laudable goal, but I don't think it should be a consideration here.

Martin

-- 
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to