On Sat, 2 May 2015, Robert Collins wrote:
This still seems like a profoundly poor idea: 'is X python3
compatible' is a turing completeness problem. There are some scripts
where you can determine compatibility, but many where you cannot until
it blows up (particularly ones with subtle bugs in str
On 2 May 2015 at 13:39, Geoffrey Thomas wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Apr 2015, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>> I like it and I don't. If /usr/bin/python is ever going to point to a
>> non-
>> python2 version, then I think the solution is something like this. OTOH,
>> it
>> adds system complexity and presumab
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I like it and I don't. If /usr/bin/python is ever going to point to a non-
python2 version, then I think the solution is something like this. OTOH, it
adds system complexity and presumably slows interpreter startup.
If the implementation were simple
#!/usr/bin/python32
For bilingual scripts.
On 17 Apr 2015 2:30 pm, "Geoffrey Thomas" wrote:
> I've written up the proposal I made a few days ago for a /usr/bin/python
> launcher that keeps the API of being Python 2, but lets scripts opt in to
> running on Python 3:
>
> https://ldpreload.com/blog
On 21 April 2015 at 08:15, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >For third parties who want to distribute scripts that run out-of-the-box
> >everywhere (installers, cross-platform system management or monitoring
> >scripts, build scripts, etc.), Python 3 isn't an option. If we remove
> Python
> >2 from the defa
On Apr 21, 2015, at 10:42 AM, Geoffrey Thomas wrote:
>For third parties who want to distribute scripts that run out-of-the-box
>everywhere (installers, cross-platform system management or monitoring
>scripts, build scripts, etc.), Python 3 isn't an option. If we remove Python
>2 from the default i
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
To be honest, I don't like this proposal.
- Newly written code should *just* use Python 3 (there are exceptions, but
very few).
- If existing code supports Python 3, and its developers consider Python 3
as a target platform, then it should *just* u
Hi,
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:11:45 -0400 (EDT), Geoffrey Thomas wrote:
> I've written up the proposal I made a few days ago for a /usr/bin/python
> launcher that keeps the API of being Python 2, but lets scripts opt in to
> running on Python 3:
>
> https://ldpreload.com/blog/usr-bin-python-23
>
> Le
On Friday, April 17, 2015 05:11:45 PM Geoffrey Thomas wrote:
> I've written up the proposal I made a few days ago for a /usr/bin/python
> launcher that keeps the API of being Python 2, but lets scripts opt in to
> running on Python 3:
>
> https://ldpreload.com/blog/usr-bin-python-23
>
> I share t
I think the basic shape of this idea is good - it's a neat way to keep the
ubiquitous 'python' command available as Python 2 starts to go away,
without breaking compatibility with all the scripts that expect that
command to mean Python 2. You're essentially saying that 'python' can be
Python 3, but
I've written up the proposal I made a few days ago for a /usr/bin/python
launcher that keeps the API of being Python 2, but lets scripts opt in to
running on Python 3:
https://ldpreload.com/blog/usr-bin-python-23
I share the desire for /usr/bin/python to maintain its API of being Python
2, bu
11 matches
Mail list logo
