On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 02:25:53PM +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > In my experience, writing polyglot 2+3 code can be easily handled with a > few helper functions, which is not the case with unicode string > literals. (Non-polygot code of course can just use the methods > directly.) I don't see this is a problem to be solved, or even much of a > nuisance. Polyglot code is never going to be quite as straightforward or > idiomic as non-polyglot code, and that's a good thing, as it reminds the > reader that they are dealing with polyglot code. The problem i currently see is that most polyglot-projects are reimplementing the same helper functions (for dict access, literals wrapping etc), not depending on six because the authors don't feel it's "worth the extra dependency", as they never need the full functionality of six. So how about including a subset of six' more popular functionality into the standard libraries of Python 2 and 3? I think it would solve the problem i described (i.e. remove boilerplate for polyglot code), while it would also avoid compromising the builtins of Python 3 (and keep polyglot code "explicitly ugly") Also, that's why people demanded a Python 2.8... so that you don't have to pollute Python 3 instead. -- Markus
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