Sorry, it happens to me all the time, I reply to person and forget about mailing list.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Pawel Jasinski <pawel.jasin...@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:20 AM Subject: Re: [Ironpython-users] Item 34263 in 2.7.5? To: "Vernon D. Cole" <vernondc...@gmail.com> I agree with Vernon. My typical use case is python.org docs. For ironpython 2.7, I select 2.7 for 3.0, hm ... 3.0, 3.4 or 3.5? Why do we need to break it? What is the benefit? --pawel On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Vernon D. Cole <vernondc...@gmail.com> wrote: > -1 on version number 3.0. > > Just last week I was in a complete panic when I discovered that the version > of Python embedded in moneydance was "Jython 2.0". After some frantic > searching, I discovered that Jython 2.0 implements Python 2.5. Their > current beta is numbered 2.7b1 because of such confusion. > > I also seem to remember many emails and other explanations about "IronPython > version 2.0 implements the Python 2.5 specification" so that the next > version of IronPython was numbered to match the language spec. That is a > good tradition to keep. > > > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Jeff Hardy <jdha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Vernon D. Cole <vernondc...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > I think that would be version 3.3 (or will it be 3.4?) which will be the >> > next "major" release. (Since there will never be a version of Python 2 >> > higher than "2.7" all 2.x releases henceforth will be "point" releases. >> > Let me hasten to point out that, since the unicode vs string vs bytes >> > issue in Python 3 is well defined, the transition to IronPython 3 ought >> > to >> > be painless. Many of the incompatibilities between IronPython and >> > CPython >> > will just go away. Since we will skip ["3.0", "3.1", "3.2"] we will >> > never >> > have to remove the u"unicode string marker", which was the biggest pain >> > in >> > writing runs-on-either version code. 2.7 <-> 3.3 is easy. >> >> Yeah, this change won't happen until IronPython 3. I'm also going to >> take the opportunity to break from the convention of matching CPython >> versions and just call it 3.0, even though it will have everything up >> to 3.4 in it. PEP 421 (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0421/) has >> the mechanism to make this work. >> >> And yes, my hope is that moving to 3 will be much less problematic for >> IronPython than it is for CPython. Other than a few things (like >> changing the default Frames setting) there shouldn't be too many >> breaking changes. >> >> - Jeff > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironpython-users mailing list > Ironpython-users@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/ironpython-users > _______________________________________________ Ironpython-users mailing list Ironpython-users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/ironpython-users
