I totally agree with your logic for migrating to Python 2.6. However, this would be somewhat problematic for me.
My Coopr software relies on PLY as well as other software packages that only support Python 2.5 (specifically, the Python interfaces for CPLEX and GUROBI). So, a migration of PLY 4.0 to Python 2.6 would force me to stick with an older version of PLY. :( This wouldn't be a big problem, though, since the current version of PLY seems to work fine. --Bill On Oct 13, 7:45 am, David Beazley <[email protected]> wrote: > It's been a little while since there was a new release of PLY, but a number > of minor bug reports have surfaced. So, I'm thinking about making a PLY-3.4 > release sometime before the end of October. If anyone has any issues and/or > feature requests, please post them here or submit to the ply bug tracker. > > On a slightly different note, I'm thinking about dropping support for older > Python versions (only supporting Python 2.6 or newer). I probably won't do > this in the PLY-3.4 release, but I might introduce a PLY-4.0 release that > requires a modern version. The main reason for this is that I want to take > advantage of newer Python features such as generators, generator expressions, > etc. I also want to use syntax that more seamlessly makes PLY work with > Python 2/3 (the "as" form of exceptions, print function, etc.). If anyone > has any thoughts about this, they should let me know. > > Cheers, > Dave -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ply-hack" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ply-hack?hl=en.
