RetroSearch Browse

Fri Oct 29 21:56:37 CEST 2010 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-October/105059.html

2010/10/29 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>:
> I had a brief conversation with Michael Foord yesterday and he's writing code
> that works in 2.4 through 3.2, so for *some* code bases, it's tricky and ugly,
> but possible.

If the application does not involve a lot of I/O, 2.4 -> 3.2 support
by using a unique code base is possible and not that ugly.
At least, that's what happened with psutil:
http://code.google.com/p/psutil/issues/detail?id=75&can=1&q=python%203&colspec=ID%20Summary%20Type%20Opsys%20Status%20Milestone%20Opened%20Owner%20Progress#c9
My personal choice is to encourage the same approach where possible.

Regards,

--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib
http://code.google.com/p/psutil

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-October/105059.html below:

[Python-Dev] Continuing 2.x