RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jan 10 21:16:09 CET 2007 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-January/070538.html

On 1/10/07, Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org> wrote:
> On 1/10/07, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at verizon.net> wrote:
> > It is my strong preference that we not go down this path.
> > Instead, the 2.6 vs 3.0 difference analysis should go in an
> > external lint utility.
> >
> > The Py2.x series may live-on for some time and should do so
> > as if Py3.x did not exist.  Burdening the 2.x code with loads
> > of warnings will only clutter the source code and make maintenance
> > more difficult.  There may also be some performance impact.
> >
> > We should resolve that Py2.6 remain as clean as possible
> > and that Py3.0 be kept in its own world.  Forging a new
> > blade does not have to entail dulling the trusty old blade.
>
> The idea is that we only generate the warnings optionally, only for things
> that can be written in a manner compatible with prevalent Python versions,
> and in the most efficient manner we can manage, *except* for the few things
> that are already considered (by many) criminal to use: input(), backtics,
> mixed tabs and spaces. In other words, for any code written even remotely
> sane in the last five years, no extra warnings will be generated.

I'd rather see this effort invested in a tool like Guido's 2to3,
rather than in sprinkling warnings all through the 2.x codebase (even
if they are wrapped in #ifdef's). I don't imagine people developing
day-to-day in a 2.x environment are going to be so terribly interested
in "is this 3.x compliant?" that downloading a separate tool would be
an undue burden.

Collin Winter

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-January/070538.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Warning for 2.6 and greater