[Python-3000] Py3k release schedule worries (original) (raw)

Neal Norwitz nnorwitz at gmail.com
Wed Dec 20 10:19:03 CET 2006

On 12/19/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

On 12/18/06, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote: [me] > > Well, what do you think of my pronouncement in response to Thomas's > > mail (just rename a bunch of things that don't conform to our own > > naming standard)? That should limit the discussion to what's the best > > name for StringIO etc. > > Sounds good. The only sticky point is whether we want to keep this > dichotomy of C/Python implementations ala pickle and StringIO going. I > personally would rather choose one (Python or C) and then work on getting > the other to have the proper semantics. If we choose the C version we can > stick the Python versions into lib-old or something so that if alternative > Python implementations want to keep them alive and up-to-date they can for > their own usage but the burden is taken off of us.

Just to clairfy, I think this should all be done the way heapq.py / heapq.c work. Python users should only import the "python" module which should contain a complete implementation in Python but which replaces selective parts (or everything) with faster versions from the C module if available.

To further clarify, stuff like this should be done on HEAD for 2.6. This is not a backwards incompatible change. We can forward port to the 3k branch (see Thomas Wouters msg in a diff thread).

These changes mean we need to ensure the C impl provides a consistent interface with the Python version (or falls back when appropriate).

n

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list