The looming Python 3(000) monster

[Michael DeHaan]

James Antill wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 20:45 +0200, Basil Mohamed Gohar wrote:
>
>   
>> It would be very hard to write 2.6 code that is completely compatible
>> with 3.0, because 3.0 has changed many fundamental language constructs,
>> including even the "print" statement, which in 3.0 is a function (syntax
>> change).
>>
>> I am not sure how far the from __future__ import feature will work for
>> such changes as that.
>>     
>
>  Sigh...
>
> from __future__ import print_function
>
> ...can everyone who isn't involved in writing python code, and/or not
> read about 2.6 / 3.0 before this thread please not comment?
>   

Not defined in older versions of python however, hence the need to 
branch code, hence a problem with EPEL supporting code.

--Michael
>
>  As Toshio Kuratomi said extremely well, in the grand parent to this
> post:
>
>         Note that I think this decision is only partially within the
>         powers of the Fedora Project to decide.  If 80% of our upstream
>         libraries move to py3, we'll need to move to py3 sooner.  If 80%
>         refuse to move off of py2, we can take our time working on
>         migration code.
>
> ...so as I said, we don't have concrete plans yet ... and some of that
> is because it depends on available resources within the project, but a
> lot of that is because we have to follow upstream and it's not obvious
> how fast (the majority of) python developers upstream will move.
>
>