[Python-ideas] Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!
rhamph at gmail.com
Sat Feb 2 08:08:33 CET 2008
[bah. Resending to the list this time.]
On Feb 1, 2008 11:41 PM, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve <rwgk at yahoo.com> wrote:
> PLEASE GIVE THE PYTHON 3 EXECUTABLE A DIFFERENT NAME AND THE SCRIPTS
> A DIFFERENT EXTENSION.
We're already have half of that:
$ python2.1 -V
$ python2.2 -V
$ python2.3 -V
$ python2.4 -V
$ python2.5 -V
They also have often broken python code that depended on one or two
small details, and we haven't needed a new extension before.
Now it's true that py3k will break much more than before, but I still
don't see the need to differentiate based on extension. Installed
libraries have the version in the directory name and installed
programs should specify a version in their shebang.
The *only* issue I see is that, if you run the 2to3 tool on your
2.6-targetted codebase, it needs to output into a different directory
so that you can distinguish them. That's so trivial that I question
even mentioning it though.
Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus
More information about the Python-ideas