Robert Kern wrote: > On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:58, Bruce Southey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> I think this is a great idea but I am curious about what NumPy will be >> doing with Python 3. The Python 3 final is scheduled for 1st October >> release so is there a policy on handling the migration to Python 3 or >> dual support of the 2 and 3 series? >> > > We're still evaluating the situation. Rahul Garg has spent some time > yesterday at the sprint looking at it. > > http://www.scipy.org/Python3k > > The situation is complicated for us because we have C code that uses > some of the removed parts of the C API. The recommended approach > (single 2.x source tree, and convert using 2to3 and manual patches for > 3.x) isn't quite germane. If the necessary changes are small enough, > then it is possible that manual patches or some #ifdefs will be > sufficient. Given Rahul's initial findings (thank you, Rahul!), I > think this will probably be feasible. If it is not, then we have a > significant problem. If we have to have two different code bases, none > of the alternatives are very appealing. > > We do want to support Python 3.0 as soon as possible, but we need more > hands and eyes on the code. If Python 3.0 support is important to you, > please take a look at Rahul's findings and think about how to address > them. > > Thanks. > >
Thanks Rahul for that work as it is very interesting! At present my concern for the Python 3k is only one of inevitability. Bruce _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
