5 ms·

Easy to say when you don't depend on C extensions only compatible with 2.7.

• gkya 10y ago
  How hard it is to port a C extension? I don't really know the APIs, but is it impossible to transform by a script?
  • novocaine 10y ago
    My experience is that it is drastically easier to port C extensions than to port python code itself - the C API hasn't really changed a lot and it's usually very easy to reason about C code due to it being more strongly typed than python. The only reason why it might be hard is you are unfamiliar with the extension's code and/or C
  • throwawayish 10y ago
    Not hard. You can support 3 and 2 in the same file without much hassle. Practical example: https://github.com/zopefoundation/BTrees/blob/master/BTrees/_compat.h https://github.com/zopefoundation/BTrees/blob/master/BTrees/... https://github.com/zopefoundation/BTrees/blob/master/BTrees/BTreeModuleTemplate.c https://github.com/zopefoundation/BTrees/blob/master/BTrees/... There are a couple #if PY3K, but not much, really. I ported a bunch of extension modules, total a couple thousand LOC, and it was pretty much a matter of reading the docs (see guide at https://docs.python.org/3/howto/cporting.html https://docs.python.org/3/howto/cporting.html ) and adding a few #ifs. Total time maybe an hour or two.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
• nsomaru 10y ago
  You're calling code that depends on C extensions from directly inside the request-response cycle? One possible solution would be to offload this work into a celery worker which can call python2 as necessary.
  • osullivj 10y ago
    I code against both Django and Tornado. My Tornado based HTTP servers call C extension while they're handling GETs and POSTs. And that's why I'm staying on 2.7.8 until a customer pays me to port to 3.
    • Siecje 10y ago
      I'm curious why 2.7.8? What is preventing you from using 2.7.9+?
      • osullivj 10y ago
        2.7.8 was the latest 2.x when I built the current codebase. Currently I'm testing before a cloud launch. Fixing bugs in my product's functionality is a higher priority than porting to the latest 2.7
        • tedmiston 10y ago
          Python 2.7.9 Release Date: 2014-12-10 https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-279/ https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-279/
          • nostrademons 10y ago
            2 years is not an unusual time between starting product development and seeing any sort of major customer uptake, and if you're in that time period, your priority really should be getting the customers rather than futzing with code migrations.
            • toyg 10y ago
              It's still the case that a bad call was made when the codebase was started, picking a language version that was already on its way out. It's like starting a new project now with Java 7 o .Net 2.0.
• rbanffy 10y ago
  How many are still at that stage?
• takeda 10y ago
  Is really not that hard to make C extension support Python 3, you're either using an extension that is no longer maintained, or its author(s) are stubborn, which is a different kind of problem. Making code compatible with python2.7 onward means that you can't use any new features from 3+ and the code is plain ugly, I don't know if you wrote 2/3 compatible code, it is not as enjoyable to do. I think Django's approach where the LTS will still work on 2.7 (and LTS is for 3 years, which is until python2 itself stop being maintained) is fair. You still have 3 years to fix things and if you want to use latest Django and be cutting edge, you probably should use latest Python as well.
• flukus 10y ago
  Wouldn't the problem be that you're already relying on unmaintained software?