Python 3.0 migration plans?
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Fri Sep 28 04:30:51 CEST 2007
TheFlyingDutchman <zzbbaadd at aol.com> writes:
> It seems that Python 3 is more significant for what it removes than
> what it adds.
That's certainly the focus of an explicitly backward-incompatible
> What are the additions that people find the most compelling?
Most of the additions that will go into 2.6 are doing so because
they'll appear in 3.0. That's a benefit: anything from 3.0 that makes
sense to add to 2.6 will go in; the rest of 3.0's changes are mostly
backwards-incompatible (i.e. removals and conflicting changes).
I find the following compelling:
- 'str' becomes Unicode type, 'int' becomes unified-int-and-long
- Consistent, unambiguous integer literal syntax
<URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3127/> and the 'bytes'
type for non-text strings
- Default source encoding is UTF-8
<URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3120/> and support for
- Reorganisation of the standard library for consistency
- Renaming raw_input to input, so 'input()' does the obvious thing
- Clarification of 'raise' and 'except' semantics
- Abstract Base Classes
- everything that's being added to 2.6 :-)
\ "I bought a self learning record to learn Spanish. I turned it |
`\ on and went to sleep; the record got stuck. The next day I |
_o__) could only stutter in Spanish." -- Steven Wright |
More information about the Python-list