when will python 2.5 take in mainstream?

[Jean-Paul Calderone]

On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:19:26 +0100, Laurent Pointal <laurent.pointal at limsi.fr> wrote:
>tleeuwenburg at gmail.com a écrit :
>> When they have to ...
>>
>> One of the big things about Python is that its penetration slows it
>> down. There's more legacy code and interdependant systems around now
>> that Python is more successful and more mature.
>>
>> Here's a thought -- perhaps it would be worth having some good ways to
>> interact with Python from Python. Suppose you have some 2.4 code
>> someplace, interacting with your mysqldb or whatever, and you don't
>> want to rewrite it. So long as you have some kind of object broker,
>> you could (plausibly) leave your 2.4 apps running with the old
>> interpreter, but wrap them for Python 2.5 and use that in your new
>> development.
>
>KISS please.
>

Requiring change is simpler than not requiring change?  Okay, perhaps
you could make a case, but it's far from obvious this is always true.

>> Ditto 3.0.
>>
>> Rather than having to re-write every interacting component, maybe it
>> could be straightforward to all Python2.4 from Python2.5 to execute
>> particular library calls. I'm not an expert, I don't know how you'd
>> build such a system, but I do know that re-writing stuff is a real
>> pain.
>
>Most of Python 2.4 source code is compatible with Python 2.5. Problems
>come with native compiled modules, you must have those for you 2.X
>Python version - some times just a compilation is enough.

Do you have any data to actually back this assertion up?  I have plenty
of evidence to the contrary.

>
>For Python 3.0, AFAIK its a big rewrite and developers know that it will
>be uncompatible in large parts with existing code.
>

How does knowing that it will not be compatible have any bearing on the
arguments made by the original poster?  It doesn't change anything, as
far as I can tell.