[Python-Dev] Any PEP about 2.6 -> 3000 code transition?
anthonybaxter at gmail.com
Wed Aug 13 14:20:47 CEST 2008
Last time I looked at it, the C API wasn't nailed down yet. That's why
I passed over it entirely for my tutorial. The only advice I was able
to give was that if your extension is just a wrapper around existing C
code, you might be better off rewriting it using ctypes. That way it
should work on both 2.6 and 3.0. This doesn't work for PyCXX, of
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:33 AM, Barry Scott <barry at barrys-emacs.org> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2008, at 22:37, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 20:16, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>>> But waiting until all the betas have gone out totally defeats the
>>> purpose of the betas!
>> I agree. Writing an actual *guide* can wait, but documenting the
>> differences with code examples is a work that can start now, and I
>> agree that it would be great if this would start now.
>> But writing a guide might not be a good idea until we know what the
>> changes are, and if the API is changing quickly now we don't. :-)
> I'm working on getting a version of PyCXX working with Python 3.0.
> The lack of any docs outside of the header files is making this a slow
> I think its a mistake to expect a serious beta test of extensions
> when you have no guide to the changes in the C API.
> If you had a guide then diff it between releases would be a guide to
> what need fixing up going from beta to beta to rc.
> Oh and I'm not going to try and make a version of PyCXX that works
> on 2.x and 3.x as the changes are too fundamental.
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
More information about the Python-Dev