On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:57:35 +0000, Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2007-09-22, Carl Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Of course it would be. The reason I mention it is that automatic >> convertibility is a key factor in whether a change can make it into >> Python 3. > > It matters not whether fugly code is automatically generated or manually > generated. It's still hard to read and maintain.
By my understanding, it really doesn't matter that much. The transition tool's purpose is to allow a subset of 2.x code to run on 3.x, so that developers don't have to maintain separate codebases to support both. The 3.x code that is produced isn't intended to be read or maintained. So no big deal if it's a little ugly. (But there's still tracebacks to read and regressions to debug, so I guess it can't be too ugly.) Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
