RetroSearch Browse

Thu Feb 28 17:49:39 CET 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-February/124469.html

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 2013, at 11:33 AM, fwierzbicki at gmail.com wrote:
>>>The easy part for Jython is pushing some of our "if is_jython:" stuff
>>>into the appropriate spots in CPython's Lib/.
>>
>> I wonder if there isn't a better way to do this than sprinkling is_jython,
>> is_pypy, is_ironpython, is_thenextbigthing all over the code base.  I have no
>> bright ideas here, but it seems like a feature matrix would be a better way to
>> go than something that assumes a particular Python implementation has a
>> particular feature set (which may change in the future).
>
> Yes, avoiding that kind of thing is a key motivation for
> sys.implementation. Any proposal for "is_jython" blocks should instead
> be reformulated as a proposal for new sys.implementation attributes.
Ah nice - the merging effort should definitely cause some careful
consideration of these. Maybe I'll start a discussion about a "garbage
collection type" for sys.implementation. Some way to ask <gc !=
"refcounted"> would catch some of these.

-Frank

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-February/124469.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python Language Summit at PyCon: Agenda