RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jul 25 00:33:46 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081538.html

On Jul 21, 2008, at 22:37, Lennart Regebro wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 20:16, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>> But waiting until all the betas have gone out totally defeats the
>> purpose of the betas!
>
> I agree. Writing an actual *guide* can wait, but documenting the
> differences with code examples is a work that can start now, and I
> agree that it would be great if this would start now.
>
> But writing a guide might not be a good idea until we know what the
> changes are, and if the API is changing quickly now we don't. :-)

I'm working on  getting a version of PyCXX working with Python 3.0.
The lack of any docs outside of the header files is making this a slow
process.

I think its a mistake to expect a serious beta test of extensions
when you have no guide to the changes in the C API.

If you had a guide then diff it between releases would be a guide to
what need fixing up going from beta to beta to rc.

Oh and I'm not going to try and make a version of PyCXX that works
on 2.x and 3.x as the changes are too fundamental.

Barry

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081538.html below:

[Python-Dev] Any PEP about 2.6 -> 3000 code transition?