On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Markus Schaber <m.scha...@3s-software.com> wrote: > Hmm, maybe we could put the host/embedder info I suggested in the other mail > there.
Yeah, and things like which which CLR version (3.5, 4.0), implementation (MS, Mono), subset (Silverlight, MonoTouch, MonoDroid), what host it's running under, etc. I was thinking of adding fields to clr for that information anyway, but it can go here instead. >> I'm not really sure there's much value in having sys.version_info and >> sys.implementation.version be different, but I believe PyPy works that >> way, so I have no objection to it. They'll be the same in IronPython, >> though. > > Hmm. It would open the possibility of IronPython supporting both Python 2.7 > and 3.X for some grace period... That ... yikes. It already does support some (not much) stuff using -X:Python30, but that introduces a bunch of if statements and makes the code quite messy. There are other ways to do it, but a clean break in a new branch seems preferable to me. Plus there's the issue of the reorganized stdlib, which I'm not really sure how to cleanly solve. So my preference is to work in a different branch to 3k support. I'd like to do some work after 2.7.3 is released, but I'm not sure I'll get to it. - Jeff _______________________________________________ Ironpython-users mailing list Ironpython-users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/ironpython-users
