[Python-3000] Py3k release schedule worries

[Neal Norwitz]

On 12/19/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> On 12/18/06, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> [me]
> > > Well, what do you think of my pronouncement in response to Thomas's
> > > mail (just rename a bunch of things that don't conform to our own
> > > naming standard)? That should limit the discussion to what's the best
> > > name for StringIO etc.
> >
> > Sounds good.  The only sticky point is whether we want to keep this
> > dichotomy of C/Python implementations ala pickle and StringIO going.  I
> > personally would rather choose one (Python or C) and then work on getting
> > the other to have the proper semantics.  If we choose the C version we can
> > stick the Python versions into lib-old or something so that if alternative
> > Python implementations want to keep them alive and up-to-date they can for
> > their own usage but the burden is taken off of us.
>
> Just to clairfy, I think this should all be done the way heapq.py /
> _heapq.c work. Python users should only import the "python" module
> which should contain a complete implementation in Python but which
> replaces selective parts (or everything) with faster versions from the
> C module if available.

To further clarify, stuff like this should be done on HEAD for 2.6.
This is not a backwards incompatible change.  We can forward port to
the 3k branch (see Thomas Wouters msg in a diff thread).

These changes mean we need to ensure the C impl provides a consistent
interface with the Python version (or falls back when appropriate).

n