David Harvey wrote: > > On Sep 11, 2007, at 2:51 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > >>> What I'm more worried about is cython compatibility, especially if >>> python internals have changed a lot. >> Me too... It looks like 2.x is going to be around for a while though, >> so we'll hopefully have time to transition. I'm not looking forward >> to having to have a 2.x and 3.x branch of Cython :-( > > Well I thought about this a bit more, and now I'm starting to think > it's not going to be *too* bad. There's a lot of existing C code out > there that uses the Python C API, and I doubt that python 3000 is > going to totally break all that code. The python developers surely > know that that existing codebase is one of python's strengths as a > "real language". Also I read somewhere that python 3000 is not being > rewritten from scratch, it's based on the 2.x code. >
Yes, be warned: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html Reinvinting your _own_ wheel is bad! And read http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3099/ Things that will not change! > But who knows.... I guess we'll find out in the next few years. > > david Jaap --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
