[Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Warning for 2.6 and greater

Jack Diederich jackdied at jackdied.com
Thu Jan 11 03:47:57 CET 2007


On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 06:04:05PM -0800, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> [Anthony Baxter]
> > I've had a number of people say that this is something they would 
> > really, really like to see - the idea is both to let people migrate 
> > more easily, and provide reassurance that it won't be that bad to 
> > migrate!
> 
> If Py3.0 is going to come out before Py2.6, can we table the discussion
> until then?  We may find that a) migration was easier than we thought,
> b) that stand-alone migration tools are sufficient, or c) by the time
> Py2.6 comes-out, no one cares about having 2.x vs 3.x warnings.
> OTOH, if people do care, then we'll have a strong case for loading
> these warnings into Py2.6 before it gets close to being final.

I'm also a fan of not scratching something until it itches but if
someone else already feels the itch and wants to do the work +0.
The pro warnings camp has said it won't add interpreter overhead unless
you ask for it (and they are willing to test that it is so).

> Also, I'm wondering if the desire for 2.6 warnings is based on the notion that 
> it will be possible to get large tools to work under both Py2.x and Py3.x.
> With all the module renaming/packaging, old-style classes disappearing,
> encoded text objects, real division and whatnot; that notion may be
> a pipe-dream.

No one has seriously suggested that it would be easy or if you prefer
no one serious has suggested it would be easy ;)

> As far as "reassurance that it won't be that bad to migrate", screens full
> of warnings may be less than reassuring.

If folks want to put in the effort (and people heavier than me have 
offered) to support light-weight optional warnings in addition to the
2to3 tool I can't complain.  It seems redundant to me but their time isn't
mine.

-Jack


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list