Re: implementing zope.component 4.0
Martin Aspeli <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hanno Schlichting wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Wichert Akkerman <[email protected]> wrote: >> We could also say that we will clean up the API when we move to Python >> 3. That is a natural breaking point anyway, so it will not any extra >> pain for users of the ZCA. > > Except that is precisely what the Python developers have asked > everyone not to do. So far the story is that the upgrade to Python 3 > can be done largely automatic and a codebase for 2.x and 3.x can be > maintained automatically and kept in sync. That's a nice theory, but experience suggests it'll be a right mess. Is anyone doing this successfully on a project of a comparable size to Zope? Or Plone? It sounds like fantasy to me. Why? Because if the compatibility really was that "mechanical" there would probably be a way to run Python 2 code in Python 3 - and there isn't. > Once you introduce semantic instead of syntactic differences outside > Python 3 itself into the whole mix, it gets virtually impossible to > maintain a codebase that works on both 2.x and 3.x. This feels like we're trying to solve a different problem. > So while the Python 3 uptake is still slow, I think we shouldn't add > more roadblocks onto that path. A laudable goal, but I don't think it should be a consideration here. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [email protected] https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )