[Python-Dev] readd u'' literal support in 3.3?
Laurence Rowe
l at lrowe.co.uk
Tue Dec 13 14:33:42 CET 2011
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby wrote:
>
>
>> As someone who ported WebOb and other stuff built on top of it
>> to Python
>> 3 without using "from __future__ import unicode_literals", I'm
>> kinda sad
>> that to be using best practice I'll have to go back and flip
>> the
>> polarity on everything.
>>
>>
>> Eh? If you don't need unicode_literals, what's the problem?
>
> Porting the WebOb code sucked. It's only about 5K lines of code but the
> porting effort took me about 80 hours. Some of the problem is certainly
> my own idiocy, but some of it is just because straddling code across
> Python 2 and Python 3 currently requires that you change lots and lots
> of code for suspect benefit.
Could this manual work be cut down if there was a version of 2to3 that
targeted the subset of the language that is compatible with both 2 and 3?
That would seem to avoid most of the drawbacks to the current 2to3
approach.
Laurence
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list