Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #63352 > unrolled thread

Re: "More About Unicode in Python 2 and 3"

Started byDevin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com>
First post2014-01-06 13:43 -0800
Last post2014-01-06 13:43 -0800
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: "More About Unicode in Python 2 and 3" Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2014-01-06 13:43 -0800

#63352 — Re: "More About Unicode in Python 2 and 3"

FromDevin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com>
Date2014-01-06 13:43 -0800
SubjectRe: "More About Unicode in Python 2 and 3"
Message-ID<mailman.5070.1389044629.18130.python-list@python.org>
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I find all this intriguing.  People haven't found time to migrate from
> Python 2 to Python 3, but now intend finding time to produce a fork of
> Python 2 which will ease the migration to Python 3.  Have I got that
> correct?

Keeping old, unsupported (by upstream) things up-to-date is a common
operation (e.g. this is what Red Hat does for an entire operating
system). It might take a few hours to backport a module or bugfix you
want, but updating an entire million-LOC codebase would take
significantly longer. Plus, if a benefit of backporting things is an
easier eventual migration to 3.x, it's killing two birds with one
stone.

At any rate it's not a possibility to sneer at and suggest is
improbable or a waste of time. It is a rational outcome for a codebase
of a large enough size.

-- Devin

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python


csiph-web