<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/24/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Guido van Rossum</b> <<a href="mailto:guido@python.org">guido@python.org</a>> wrote:</span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I know that you are dreaming of a world where all transitions are<br>easy. But it's just a dream. 3.0 will require hard work and for many<br>large apps it will take years to migrate -- the best approach is<br>probably to make it coincide with a planned major rewrite of the app.
</blockquote><div><br>I agree with everything you said, except this. Yes, Python 2.x -> 3.x will always be a large step, no matter which 'x' you take. That shouldn't (and doesn't, so far) mean you can't write code that works fine in both
2.x and 3.x, and transitioning applications from 2.x-only code to 2.x-and-3.x-code could then be done incrementally. It would probably need support from future 2.x releases in order to make that possible, but it shouldn't affect
3.x. It will still be a rather big effort from applications, but not any bigger than porting to 3.x in the first place.<br></div></div><br>-- <br>Thomas Wouters <<a href="mailto:thomas@python.org">thomas@python.org</a>
><br><br>Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!