On Feb 16, 2:54 pm, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 06:42:55 -0800, Fuzzyman wrote: > > I mentioned the 2to3 translator- the goal of which is *precisely* to > > allow you to write code that will run on Python 2.X and when > > translated run under Python 3.0. > > Unfortunately, that is not a realistic goal for the 2to3 translator. The > goal is to accurately translate 80% of Python code that needs changing, > and issue warnings for the other 20%. >
Right, but it *was* a stated aim of the translator when discussed on Python-dev recently. > > You then repeated the problem with the 'print' statement. > > > It may be true that you won't be able to write code that runs > > untranslated on 2 and 3. That doesn't stop you writing code for Python > > 2.X, then translating a version for Python 3. (Uhm... indeed that's > > the point of 2to3.) > > > So you only have one codebase to maintain and you can still use > > print... > > No, you have TWO sets of code. You have the code you write, and the code > you have run through 2to3. Even if 2to3 gives you 100% coverage, which it > won't, you still have two codebases. > Only one of which you maintain - if the translator works 100% (which I accept may be unrealistic). Fuzzyman http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/articles.shtml > -- > Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
