Python 3

[David Cournapeau]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Ben Finney <ben+bazaar at benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Russel Winder <russel at russel.org.uk> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 16:11 +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
>> > One of the major points of this thread and previous ones is that we
>> > are not prepared to give up 2.4 support yet. I do realize that it
>> > would be easier to support 3.x if we dropped 2.4 but we're not going
>> > there yet.
>>
>> As far as I am aware you have to go to 2.6 and drop all pre-2.6 idioms
>> to have any chance of 2to3 and 3to2 being useful.  With 2.4 and 2.5
>> factors in the equation, then looking at 3 is for the future --
>> certainly this is the view in the SCons team.
>
> +1.
>
> I think Python 2.4 ↔ 3.1 is too broad a range to try supporting from a
> single code base. This is exacerbated by the fact that Python 2.4 and
> 2.5 are not receiving upstream support, and Python 2.6 will soon be
> receiving very little attention upstream (once Python 2.7 is released).

I am not claiming any strong relevance to bzr, but in numpy, we intend
to support python 2.4 -> python 3.1 (and we have a lot of C code :) ),
and it seems we will manage to do it.

Yes, it is quite painful - and I would guess not very useful for an
application like bzr. To be honest, I don't see the point in python 3.
the benefits seem ridiculous compared to the backward incompatibility
pain and the only reason why I am contributing to the py3 port of
Numpy/Scipy is to be good "python citizen".

David
>
> --
>  \         “If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we |
>  `\           despise, we don't believe in it at all.” —Noam Chomsky, |
> _o__)                                                       1992-11-25 |
> Ben Finney
>