3 ms·
I read their argument as, getting the codebase to the point at which running 2to3 completes the transformation. I personally remain unconvinced that that code w
by misnome 7y ago
I read their argument as, getting the codebase to the point at which running 2to3 completes the transformation. I personally remain unconvinced that that code wouldn't require the equivalent of a compatibility library anyway.
And, do hard cutovers ever work well?
- kevin_thibedeau 7y agoIt's the same work as porting to a compatibility library but you don't have to carry any legacy long into the future once the port is finished.
- sitkack 7y agoThis is a hard cut over from Python2 to 3. This presupposes that both upstream and downstream deps are on Python3. On which magical day does everyone decide "to have their port finished" ? If it is the same work to to support both 2 and 3 as jettison support for 2 in favor of three. Then supporting both so the system can actually upgrade is far preferable. Applications and libraries not used in isolation. To jettison support while the rest of the dependency graph is flux is analogous to gimbal lock, you can't just get here from there. Without `six` the whole Python ecosystem would have bifurcated and Python2 would still be the dominant Python.