On 24/03/2008, Lennart Regebro <regebro at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 24/03/2008, Lennart Regebro <regebro at gmail.com> wrote: > > > As I understood it nobody has claimed 2to3 to be perfect either, but > > > that using 2to3 will also require you to test the code in both > > > environments, so I don't see how that is a difference. > > > > Do you not test the code you distribute under each version of Python > > that you (claim to) support, in any case? > > Yes I do. I don't think my text above was unclear on the issue or > could be misunderstood in this way. Your statement "using 2to3 will also require you to test the code in both environments" seemed to me to say that *not* having to use 2to3 would save you from doing this (as if this were either desirable, or your current practice). My apologies if I misread your comment. What *are* you trying to say, then? It seems that you're saying that using 2to3 doesn't make things any more complex, but that contradicts your previous argument. Paul.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4