[Python-Dev] Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition (original) (raw)

Ethan Furman ethan at stoneleaf.us
Tue Dec 16 22:52:17 CET 2014

On 12/16/2014 12:31 PM, Brian Curtin wrote:

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Skip Montanaro wrote:

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:

IMO, you should consider forking your library code for Python2 and Python3. I don't get the idea that Brett Cannon agrees with you: http://nothingbutsnark.svbtle.com/commentary-on-getting-your-code-to-run-on-python-23 While he doesn't explicitly say so, I got the distinct impression reading his recent blog post that he supports one source, not forked sources. In the absence to evidence to the contrary, I think of Brett as the most expert developer in the porting space. I'm a few inches shorter than Brett, but having done several sizable ports, dual-source has never even on the table. I would prefer the "run 2to3 at installation time" option before maintaining two versions (which I do not prefer at all in reality).

I have a handful of projects. The tiny ones are one-source, the biggest one (dbf) is not.

If I had an entire application I would probably split the difference, and just have dual source on a single module to hold the classes/functions that absolutely-had-to-have-this-or-that-feature (exec (the statement) vs exec (the function) comes to mind).

-- Ethan

-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20141216/3540a4b3/attachment.sig>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list