Hi Amaury, hi all, On 12/10/11 22:23, amauryfa wrote:
Author: Amaury Forgeot d'Arc<amauryfa@gmail.com> Branch: py3k Changeset: r47978:36b998dd9966 Date: 2011-10-12 01:52 +0200 http://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/changeset/36b998dd9966/
Log: Remove print statement
uhm... I thought that the idea was to have support for python 2 and 3 from the same codebase, while from your commits it seems that your are actually destryoing support for python 2. I think that there are several possible ways to organize the source code, each one with pros and cons. Maybe we should organize an IRC meeting with the interested people to decide which direction to follow? I.e., a list of possibilities (everyone feels free to add more): - have a branch where we have *only* python3, and rely on hg merge to get the improvements to the translator (which is what you are doing right now, I think). It's easier to write, but then it might be hard to keep in sync with the default branch - support for py2 and py3 in the same branch, with minimal duplication of code. This would mean that e.g. in ast.py you would have tons of "if py2: enable_print_stmt()", etc. Personally, I think that the codebase would become too cluttered. - support for py2 and py3 in the same branch, with some duplication of code; e.g., we could copy the existing interpreter/ into interpreter/py3k and modify it there. While we are at it, we should try hard to minimize the code duplication, but then it's up to us to decide when it's better to duplicate or when it's better to share the code between the twos. - other? ciao, Anto