On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:25 -0800, AmanKow wrote: > I am curious as to whether the django community cannot comfortably do > away with support for python 2.3 in the effort towards django 1.0. > There were significant changes made between python 2.3 and 2.4, and > continuing support of 2.3 in the django code base is a significant > restriction. As django 1.0 will not be fully compatible with .96, > this might be an opportune time to drop the 2.3 support.
Which would also mean dropping the newly added Jython support, so I'm against it for that reason. Also, in practice, there are a *lot* of installations still running Python 2.3. Sometimes it's just not convenient to upgrade your Python installation every couple of years. > > The peps of most import to my reasoning for dropping 2.3 support in > 1.0: > > PEP 218: Built-In Set Objects > Allow the removal of code that conditionally loads the set module > and allow the use of frozenset We already work around this. Not an issue. > > PEP 289: Generator Expressions > Efficiency in a web server is very important. There are many > instances in the code base where list > comprehensions are used when generator expressions would more than > suffice. As a list comprehension > basically wraps a generator expression in a call to list(), many > unneeded temporary lists can be avoided. > The resulting saving in cpu and memory could be significant. Prove it. I don't think it's worth it. Certainly not a showstopper. If you want to make optimisations, there are plenty of other places where work could be done that would have larger impact than generators (and if there's a case where a list comprehension is really hurting us, we can unwrap it into a for loop and avoid the list construction). > > PEP 318: Decorators for Functions and Methods > It is a shame that the code base can't take advantage of decorator > syntax, even as it defines useful decorators. Since there's absolutely no functional loss by not using decorators, this is a bit of a moot point. It's just syntactic sugar that we can live without. > > PEP 322: Reverse Iteration > another opportunity to reduce code We're not iterating over reversed sequences enough (the sequences aren't usually large enough) for this really to be an issue. > PEP 327: Decimal Data Type > I have seen much discussion in the group about the inclusion of > decimal.py in django.contrib.util > Removing 2.3 support makes that entire line of discussion moot. Non-issue. We already support decimals. [...] > Or, even more agressively, remove support for 2.4, as well? I am strongly -1 on this. Supporting 2.3 isn't hurting us enough to be worth handicapping all those people who take advantage of this. Regards, Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
