[Tutor] Change to Python 2.4?

[Liam Clarke]

Just reading the changes log for 2.4, biggies (to me) seem to be

new iterator objects, email.Parser rewritten to handle malformed
email, and a new collection type the deque (double ended queue). Oh,
long integers & integers merged, and sorted(), and sort() using new
keywords.

if I did a lot of email parsing, I might upgrade.

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:06:12 +0100, Anna Ravenscroft <revanna at mn.rr.com> wrote:
> Alan Gauld wrote:
> >>    How hard would it be to change to python 2.4?
> >
> >
> > Probably not very hard but, why would you want to?
> > Do you have a need?
> >
> > At work I am still using Python 2.1, and at home I
> > still use 2.2 on my Mac. I only moved to 2.3 on my
> > PC so that I could update my tutor, I am not knowingly
> > using any 2.3 specific features.
> 
> Wow. I've heard so many kewl things on 2.3 (like datetime and sets and
> sum) that I can't imagine having to work in 2.2 or earlier anymore...
> 
> > So unless you need something specific in 2.4 there
> > should be no reason to ruish to it, wait till a
> > safe point in your project - like after you get a
> > stable working release - and then upgrade at your
> > leasure...
> 
> 2.4 has worked heavily on optimization. So lots of code runs faster on
> 2.4. There's also a new Decimal type, generator expressions, reverse
> iterators, built-in set objects, simpler string substitutions, and
> decorators for functions and methods.
> 
> 
> 
> >new things in python 2.4?
> >
> > THere is usually a list available on the web site.
> 
> http://www.python.org/dev/doc/devel/whatsnew/
> 
> >>I have seen enough on this list to know that it
> >>would be advantageous for me to download it.
> >
> >
> > If you have a specifc advantage that makes the
> > advantage worth the risk then go ahead. Python
> > release changes are usually pretty easy and
> > backwardly compatible.
> 
> Generally yes. And there's no reason you can't install 2.4 in another
> directory and try both versions for a while to see which one you like
> better. Just make sure your !# line points to the right version.
> 
> >scripts written for 2.3 work for 2.4?
> 
> I can't see any reason why not. Backwards compatibility is a biggie with
> Python releases and I haven't heard of anything in the new release that
> "breaks" older ways of doing things.
> 
> > Occasionally something might break but in most
> > cases(99%?) I'd expect the 2.3 stuff to just work.
> 
> Yep.
> 
> Anna
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tutor maillist  -  Tutor at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
> 


-- 
'There is only one basic human right, and that is to do as you damn well please.
And with it comes the only basic human duty, to take the consequences.