fbe2 at comcast.net
Tue Jan 20 08:08:04 CET 2009
I haven't even looked at 3.0 yet. I have no idea what would be involved,
Andreas. Are there any changes that would cause massive alterations in
the way a person using it would want it to look and feel in emacs?
<dum de dum... checking out changes in 3.0)
Well, after spending 15 minutes reading about the changes made in 'Py3k'
I can only say that the changes to python-mode will have to be
discussed here. There are plainly some things that need to be changed.
How much depends on strategic decisions about python-mode and what we
want it to be (e.g. how serious will the syntax checking/helping be?).
Also, again, depending on strategic decisions, it *could* be hard to
make it backwardly compatible without specifying the version of Python
being used. They come pretty close to saying it's all but a new language
in a couple of places. They seem to be wanting to remove a lot of
the...ahh... (what to call it) the 'casual' feeling of Python and make
it much more strict.
I'd be glad to help with both the talking and the coding, of course.
Andreas Roehler wrote:
> Hi all,
> as we now happily are more than one person developing
> python-mode.el, we should care to avoid parallel
> writing, discuss some agenda.
> >From my perspective the following is most urgent:
> - adaptation to python 3.x (while maintaining backward compat)
> - which-function-mode
> As I'm a novice to python, I would choose the last,
> leaving first to Berverley, if he feels able to.
> Hi Beverley, do you?
> Andreas Röhler
More information about the Python-mode