[Python-Dev] Any PEP about 2.6 -> 3000 code transition?

[Anthony Baxter]

Last time I looked at it, the C API wasn't nailed down yet. That's why
I passed over it entirely for my tutorial. The only advice I was able
to give was that if your extension is just a wrapper around existing C
code, you might be better off rewriting it using ctypes. That way it
should work on both 2.6 and 3.0. This doesn't work for PyCXX, of
course :-(


On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:33 AM, Barry Scott <barry at barrys-emacs.org> wrote:
>
> On Jul 21, 2008, at 22:37, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 20:16, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> But waiting until all the betas have gone out totally defeats the
>>> purpose of the betas!
>>
>> I agree. Writing an actual *guide* can wait, but documenting the
>> differences with code examples is a work that can start now, and I
>> agree that it would be great if this would start now.
>>
>> But writing a guide might not be a good idea until we know what the
>> changes are, and if the API is changing quickly now we don't. :-)
>
> I'm working on  getting a version of PyCXX working with Python 3.0.
> The lack of any docs outside of the header files is making this a slow
> process.
>
> I think its a mistake to expect a serious beta test of extensions
> when you have no guide to the changes in the C API.
>
> If you had a guide then diff it between releases would be a guide to
> what need fixing up going from beta to beta to rc.
>
> Oh and I'm not going to try and make a version of PyCXX that works
> on 2.x and 3.x as the changes are too fundamental.
>
> Barry
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/anthony%40interlink.com.au
>
>