5 ms·

Why isn't there a branch of python 2.7.2 which introduces the features from 3.x that don't require syntax changes and fixes known bugs in 2.7.2? I get that the

by obblekk 13y ago

Why isn't there a branch of python 2.7.2 which introduces the features from 3.x that don't require syntax changes and fixes known bugs in 2.7.2? I get that these are the reward for upgrading, but it seems unreasonable to hold back.

wyager 13y ago
That would be nice. I don't like 3.x because A) I can't unpack tuples in lambda or function arguments and B) the new "encode"/"decode" scheme sucks. They have the right idea, but it's implemented poorly. I miss being able to do .encode('hex') or .decode('hex'), and I think the reasoning against this is weak. There are a lot of other little issues like this that remove a lot of the expressivity I'm used to from 2.7. Those are just the two that bother me the most.
enjo 13y ago
That was the decision made to force 3.x adoption. I wholly support it.
maxerickson 13y ago
The current release of 2.7 is 2.7.6. New bugfix releases are planned until at least 2015 (this is from the release pep: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/ http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/ ).
adharmad 13y ago
Shouldn't it be possible/feasible to form Python 2.7 and backport bugs/performance improvements from the 3.x branch? I am surprised that someone like Redhat has not done this yet. The Python community will not like it, but if there is enough demand/contributors to make it so, surely they will not refuse patches?
- briancurtin 13y ago
  Bug fixes already get backported. Features will not be added in the 2.7 line.
Goopplesoft 13y ago
That would be the death of Python 3. Promoting adoption is already hard enough...
est 13y ago
> Why isn't there a branch of python 2.7.2 which introduces the features from 3.x Because 2.7 was born for this exact reason. People use good enough 2.6 and need a bridge version between 2.6 and py3k. Many py3k features were backported to 2.7 as well. Now you want bridge over bridge?
- sitkack 13y ago
  That would be bridge-on-bridge technology and I have a patent for that.
lonetwin 13y ago
http://python-future.org/index.html http://python-future.org/index.html was recently launched for this. Is that something that you could use ?
sitkack 13y ago
Someone else mentioned future, http://python-future.org http://python-future.org but I thought I would give it another shout out. > future is the missing compatibility layer between Python 2 > and Python 3. It allows you to use a single, clean > Python 3.x-compatible codebase to support both Python 2 > and Python 3 with minimal overhead. So in effect, you can run with some Python3 isms on Python2. All your Python is now 3 like and you can start migrating without losing the underlying infrastructure.

by obblekk 13y ago

wyager 13y ago

That would be nice. I don't like 3.x because A) I can't unpack tuples in lambda or function arguments and B) the new "encode"/"decode" scheme sucks. They have the right idea, but it's implemented poorly. I miss being able to do .encode('hex') or .decode('hex'), and I think the reasoning against this is weak. There are a lot of other little issues like this that remove a lot of the expressivity I'm used to from 2.7. Those are just the two that bother me the most.

enjo 13y ago

That was the decision made to force 3.x adoption. I wholly support it.

maxerickson 13y ago

The current release of 2.7 is 2.7.6. New bugfix releases are planned until at least 2015 (this is from the release pep: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/ http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/ ).

adharmad 13y ago

Shouldn't it be possible/feasible to form Python 2.7 and backport bugs/performance improvements from the 3.x branch? I am surprised that someone like Redhat has not done this yet. The Python community will not like it, but if there is enough demand/contributors to make it so, surely they will not refuse patches?

briancurtin 13y ago
Bug fixes already get backported. Features will not be added in the 2.7 line.

Goopplesoft 13y ago

That would be the death of Python 3. Promoting adoption is already hard enough...

est 13y ago

> Why isn't there a branch of python 2.7.2 which introduces the features from 3.x Because 2.7 was born for this exact reason. People use good enough 2.6 and need a bridge version between 2.6 and py3k. Many py3k features were backported to 2.7 as well. Now you want bridge over bridge?

sitkack 13y ago
That would be bridge-on-bridge technology and I have a patent for that.

lonetwin 13y ago

http://python-future.org/index.html http://python-future.org/index.html was recently launched for this. Is that something that you could use ?

sitkack 13y ago

Someone else mentioned future, http://python-future.org http://python-future.org but I thought I would give it another shout out. > future is the missing compatibility layer between Python 2 > and Python 3. It allows you to use a single, clean > Python 3.x-compatible codebase to support both Python 2 > and Python 3 with minimal overhead. So in effect, you can run with some Python3 isms on Python2. All your Python is now 3 like and you can start migrating without losing the underlying infrastructure.