SyntaxError on progress module

[Mark Lawrence]

On 27/05/2015 16:18, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> Op Wednesday 27 May 2015 16:51 CEST schreef Mark Lawrence:
>
>> On 27/05/2015 15:11, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>>> Op Wednesday 27 May 2015 15:44 CEST schreef Mark Lawrence:
>>>
>>>> On 27/05/2015 09:42, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>>>>> Op Wednesday 27 May 2015 09:30 CEST schreef alb:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But here I have another question, as a python novice is there
>>>>>> really any reason for me to use any particular version of
>>>>>> Python?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should I start directly with the newest? What about 2.7?
>>>>>
>>>>> In principal you should use the ‘latest’ 3. The only problem is
>>>>> that a lot of libraries are not converted to 3 yet. If you need
>>>>> one of those, then you have ‘no choice’ and have to use 2.7. But
>>>>> I would recommend to use ‘from __future__' to make the 2.7 code
>>>>> as much as possible 3 compliant.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please define "a lot" whilst bearing in mind green against red
>>>> here https://python3wos.appspot.com/
>>>
>>> I just started using Python again and the first ‘real’ program I
>>> wrote I had to write with Python 2 because the needed library
>>> (libturpial, that is not listed on your link) works only with
>>> Python 2. A short search about which of the two to use gives
>>> similar answers to mine. And as far as I can see in my
>>> neighbourhood Python 2 is almost exclusively used because used
>>> libraries are only available in Python 2.
>>>
>>> This is not a scientifically substantiated argument, but for me
>>> good enough to use a lot.
>>>
>>
>> Have you actaully tried running libturpial with Python 3 or have you
>> simply taken somebody or something's word for it? I've taken code in
>> the past that was "only Python 2", run it thought the 2to3 fixer and
>> job done. Perhaps you could do the same. Perhaps you've already
>> tried. Again, you're the only person who actually knows.
>
> Of-course I tried: that is why I used “had to”. The library itself and
> libraries it depends on are only existing in a 2 version (at the
> moment). I write code that should work in 2 and 3 both as long as 2 is
> still a significant part. I call programs with python3 (even while it
> is 10 to 20 percent slower) and only when that is not possible I use
> Python 2. (Except to test if code also works with Python 2.)
>

Did you, noting that you didn't actually answer my question, and also 
noting that you do ask a lot of questions yourself?  So let's try again, 
did you or did you not run libturpial through 2to3?  If yes what went 
wrong that stopped you porting it to Python 3?

You make the statement regarding Python3 "even while it is 10 to 20 
percent slower". Where is your evidence to support this statement?

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence