IIRC I saw a bunch of changes by Jan some time ago to make our scripts support both Python 2.x and 3.x - some of them may have inadvertently be reverted.
I think it is possible to support both with some work, and some loss of neatness in the code. In particular, for one of the issues mentioned, I think `foo` has been replaced by repr(foo) which also works in older pythons. On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:16:05PM +0100, Sven Siegmund wrote: >> > Uninstall python 3, as it can override library paths. >> >> But I really need Python 3. It is much more unicode-aware than Python >> 2.x. Is there any hope that Lilypond-book will be ported to python 3? > > Patches appreciated. > >> Python 3 has been over a year around, so maybe it's time to adapt the >> source code of lilypond-book a bit, isn't it? > > Patches appreciated. > >> It would also be a great opportunity to include an option for >> alternative TeX-compilers, e.g. xelatex, not just pdflatex. > > Patches appreciated. > > > By the way, I estimate that switching all our scripts to python > 3.x would take 40 hours, with an additional 20 hours required to > make GUB include python 3.x in the installers. > > Cheers, > - Graham > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
