RetroSearch Browse

Tue Feb 28 16:29:02 CET 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/117066.html

Antoine Pitrou <solipsis <at> pitrou.net> writes:

> Wrong. The separate branches approach allows you to have a clean
> Python 3 codebase without crippling the Python 2 codebase.

There may be warts in a single codebase (you usually can't have something for
nothing), but it's not necessarily *crippled* when running in 2.x.

Of course two branches allow you to have a no-compromise approach for the code
style, but you might pay for that in time spent doing merges etc.

> Note that 2to3 is actually helpful when you choose the dual branches
> approach, and it isn't a serial dependency in that case.
> (see https://bitbucket.org/pitrou/t3k/)

Yes, 2to3 is very useful when doing an initial porting exercise. I've used it
just once in each port I've done. It also works well for a single codebase
approach, only I just follow its advice rather than letting it do the conversion
automatically.

Regards,

Vinay Sajip

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/117066.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 414 - Unicode Literals for Python 3