Am 24.04.2016 um 09:56 schrieb David Kastrup: > Noeck <noeck.marb...@gmx.de> writes: > >>> So how do you define "the default" >> >> As written before: What ships with the default installation. > > So python3 needs to be invoked using #!/usr/bin/python3 in the scripts > (what happens when Python 4 gets created), and we need to either support > Python2 and Python3 in parallel (including from GUB) _or_ make a hard > switch where we change _every_ script to use Python3 _and_ change GUB > from one version to the next. > > _And_ Wols insists that he does _not_ want to use a common subset of > Python2 and Python3 even temporarily but do this right away using > Python3-only features. > > Now having a separate prescribed #!/usr/bin/python3 shebang may seem to > make testing half-way reliable. But in reality, the LilyPond code base > does not contain #!/usr/bin/python to any sizable degree (there is a > single script which might be an oversight) but instead #!@TARGET_PYTHON@ > so again, there does not seem to be much of an alternative for an > all-or-nothing approach, and trying to mix this with making use of new > language features at the same time seems like a logistic nightmare. >
OK, but what happens when we face the situation that some distros have #!/usr/bin/python to Python 2 and other to Python 3? This is something we can't control at all, so at latest *then* we'd be in that situation, with the difference that *now* we have at least a chance to control the transition. I think this is about what Federico meant with this Guile 1.8/2 comparison - he didn't mean to say that we are in that situation *now* but that we might run into it when the decisions of the distros are taken. Urs -- Urs Liska www.openlilylib.org _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
