Hi Paul, On 3/12/19 12:21 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > That sounds very similar to 2to3, which seemed like a good approach to > the Python 2 to Python 3 transition, but fell into disuse because > people who have to support multiple versions of Python in their code > found it *far* easier to do so with a single codebase that worked with > both versions, rather than needing to use a translator. Yes, the 2to3 idea was meant but for translations inside the 3 series (from 3.x to 3.x+1).
Trying to keep a single code base for 2/3 seems like a good idea (may be the developer just cannot change to 3 fast due how big the step was) but that also have the limitation on how far you can go using new features. Once you're just on the 3 series couldn't such 2to3 concept also help to speed up ? (due the 'backwards-compatibility issue') Thanks, --francis _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
