[Python-Dev] PEP 370 and IronPython

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Fri Oct 9 20:00:53 CEST 2009

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 04:53, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk>wrote:

> Christian Heimes wrote:
>> Michael Foord wrote:
>>> I really like this scheme. The important thing for IronPython is that we
>>> can get it into Python 2.6 (along with other fixes to make distutils
>>> compatible with IronPython - like not attempting to bytecode-compile when
>>> sys.dont_write_bytecode is True).
>> I don't think my proposal will land into 2.6. The changes are too severe
>> for a bug fix release.
> Right, certainly not adding umpteen new sys attributes. :-)
> The problem is that the alternative implementations run well behind
> Python-trunk, indeed it doesn't really make sense for them to put a lot of
> effort into implementing a version that is still in development. The result
> is that they discover incompatibilites after a version has gone into 'bugfix
> only' mode.
> Whilst the fix you have described (add information to sys that is used by
> site.py and distutils) is ideal it can only go into 2.7. I would *still*
> like to see a fix in 2.6 - even if it is simple logic in site.py using
> sys.platform (if sys.platform == 'cli'; elif sys.platform == 'java' etc).
> That way IronPython 2.6 is able to be compatible with Python 2.6. This logic
> might need duplicating in distutils (I haven't looked at how distutils works
> out where the user site-packages folder is), but it is a 'maintenance only'
> fix.

But it's still a change in semantics. Tossing this into 2.6 would mean that
anyone who has worked around the current behaviour is going to have a busted

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20091009/f5353c73/attachment.htm>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list