[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?)
From: |
Matthew Peveler |
Subject: |
Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?) |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 18:09:38 -0300 |
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 5:46 PM Joram <address@hidden> wrote:
> Am 27.09.19 um 22:34 schrieb Matthew Peveler:
> > long vs int, unicode vs str, StringIO vs io, iter.next vs
> > iter.__next__, reload, xrange vs range.
>
> It is very well feasible to support both version. I hope by shims you
> mean something like¹
>
> from __future__ import division, print_function
> from builtins import range
>
> because there is no need to customly write those. I consider the link
> quite helpful.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> ¹ https://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html
Yes for using __future__, but no for builtins while it would make things
easier, it is not something that is actually built into python and would be
installable for PyPI via the future package (
https://pypi.org/project/future/). So I had to hand define the shims,
though I mostly went for
python2 -> python3 shim such:
if sys.version_info > (3,):
xrange = range
raw_input = input
as I dislike overwriting builtin functions/variables if I can avoid it as
it leads to potentially surprising behavior, though reversing that would
not be very difficult if so desired.
Matt
- Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?), (continued)
- Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?), Matthew Peveler, 2019/09/27
- Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?), Dan Eble, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, David Kastrup, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, Dan Eble, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, Matthew Peveler, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, Werner LEMBERG, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, Dan Eble, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, Matthew Peveler, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3, Dan Eble, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?), Joram, 2019/09/30
- Re: Python 3 (was: 2.20 where are we?),
Matthew Peveler <=
Re: 2.20 where are we?, David Kastrup, 2019/09/21