On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Amit Aronovitch <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Meir Kriheli <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Ram Rachum <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I think that your criticism applies only to print statements which have >>> a comma in them, and I think these are the minority. >>> >>> >> For me the problem is that it alters the data passed to print, which is >> undesired (for example print can be overriden in 3, and that may lead to >> unexpected behavior). >> >> >> Plus the parenthesis is a minor one for me, and won't contribute much to >> the move to python 3, there are larger fish to fry (Unicode/Bytes, absolute >> imports), and handling them is part of my preferred strategy for 2 to 3 >> (see next section). >> >> As far as I know the `2to3` tool doesn't produce code that's >>> backwards-compatible with Python 2. >>> >>> >> And it doesn't have to. My preferred strategy for 2 and 3 is not making >> sure the same code base works with both branches - difficult and error >> prone and undesirable (later down the road one will be left with cruft to >> clean up). >> >> A better one is to make sure your code passes 2to3, and during build >> process, if it's python 3, run 2to3 with distribute: >> >> http://packages.python.org/distribute/python3.html >> > > Seems like a good idea. > > BTW, anyone tried 3to2 <http://wiki.python.org/moin/3to2> ? > If that works fine, then at some point one could shift the main > development to 3, and keep 2.x support for a while using the reverse method. > Ha, nice one. Didn't know about it, thanks :) But the distribute trick won't work it I guess. BTW, How many from this list are writing 3.x only code ? Cheers -- Meir Kriheli http://meirkriheli.com
_______________________________________________ Python-il mailing list [email protected] http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-il
