The real problem with Python 3 - no business case for conversion
Terry Reedy
tjreedy at udel.edu
Thu Jul 8 00:11:54 EDT 2010
On 7/7/2010 10:49 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Yes, that's what I meant. Python 3 is deliberately under no obligation
> to support code that works in Python 2. If something needs fixing, and
> that fix would involve breaking Python 2 code, then that's not a
> consideration any more.
Code that works in 3.1 *is* 3.1 code. Leaving aside bug fixes and
additions that makes code that once raised an exception do something
instead, I do not know that 3.1 broke and 3.0 code and I do not know of
any deprecations in 3.1 that will become removals in 3.2.
> The predictable result is that Python 3 will continue to gain
> backward-incompatible changes in future.
For the core syntax, not too likely. In any case, the usually 3 version
pending-deprecation, deprecation, removal process would apply. Some of
the library modules that do not work well for 3.1 will see more changes.
>> On the other hand, the door appears closed for Python 3 adding more
>> stuff that breaks Python 2 code.
>
> What gives you that idea? Can you reference a specific statement from
> the PYthon developers that says that?
3.0 was stated to be a special case. I will let you look.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
More information about the Python-list
mailing list