En Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:18:13 -0300, John Nagle <na...@animats.com>
escribió:
Luis M. González wrote:
On Dec 6, 3:21 pm, vsoler <vicente.so...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd argue against using Python 2.6 for production work. Either use
Python 2.5, which is stable, or 3.x, which is bleeding-edge. 2.6 has
some of the
features of Python 3.x, but not all of them, and is neither fish nor fowl
as a result. 2.6 is really more of a sideline that was used for trying
out new features, not something suitable for production.
I think the idea is to run your 2.5 code through '2to3" and see if it
works in 3.x.
In addition to Ned Deily's previous comments, I'd like to note that 2to3
assumes the source is valid 2.6 code - you have to ensure the code runs
fine with Python 2.6 before using 2to3 to convert to 3.x
--
Gabriel Genellina
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
