[Web-SIG] Unicode in Python 3
armin.ronacher at active-4.com
Sat Sep 19 16:00:49 CEST 2009
René Dudfield schrieb:
> Rather than using a 2to3 tool - which then makes you have two versions
> of your code, making the code work in python 2.x and 3.x. 2to3
> outputs python2.x incompatible code - when it doesn't have to.
2to3 is intended to be run automatically for each release. You would
not maintain two versions.
> It would mean code bases need to support b'' - which is not compatible
> with python2. This makes it harder to port, as it restricts people to
> having separate code bases for each language. This is not possible
> for some code bases since it double the maintenance burden.
> Convincing people to port to python3 is already hard enough.
Byte literals are available in Python 2.6. As far as I'm concerend I
don't see a real reason to port to Python 3 at the moment. We should
rather get our stuff ready that once Python 2.6 is the standard the
porting becomes as simple as possible. Supporting Python 2.4, 2.5, 2.6
and 3.x is a very complex task that does not work for every library (due
to changed APIs for example).
> Well, this thread is about python3 issues. I think there's enough
> people who want to consider the python3 issues to not ignore it.
We cannot fight on too many fronts at the same time. This thread is
about unicode and encodings, not about Python 3 syntax. 2to3 tackles
the latter, if it does not work for you, consider writing that to the
More information about the Web-SIG