On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:32, Michael Foord <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk>wrote:
> The *only* change in semantics I'm proposing is for users of IronPython 2.6 > which is not even at final release yet. CPython users would be unaffected. > > Then why can't IronPython patch site.py to do what they want? I still feel uncomfortable changing site.py for this in a micro release. > Sorry for top-posting, mobile device. > > Aahz was the most adamant hater of top-posting and he isn't subscribed to python-dev anymore, so whatever. -Brett > Michael > > > -- > http://www.ironpythoninaction.com > > On 9 Oct 2009, at 19:00, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 04:53, Michael Foord < <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> > fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > >> Christian Heimes wrote: >> >>> Michael Foord wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I really like this scheme. The important thing for IronPython is that we >>>> can get it into Python 2.6 (along with other fixes to make distutils >>>> compatible with IronPython - like not attempting to bytecode-compile when >>>> sys.dont_write_bytecode is True). >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I don't think my proposal will land into 2.6. The changes are too severe >>> for a bug fix release. >>> >>> >> >> Right, certainly not adding umpteen new sys attributes. :-) >> >> The problem is that the alternative implementations run well behind >> Python-trunk, indeed it doesn't really make sense for them to put a lot of >> effort into implementing a version that is still in development. The result >> is that they discover incompatibilites after a version has gone into 'bugfix >> only' mode. >> >> Whilst the fix you have described (add information to sys that is used by >> site.py and distutils) is ideal it can only go into 2.7. I would *still* >> like to see a fix in 2.6 - even if it is simple logic in site.py using >> sys.platform (if sys.platform == 'cli'; elif sys.platform == 'java' etc). >> That way IronPython 2.6 is able to be compatible with Python 2.6. This logic >> might need duplicating in distutils (I haven't looked at how distutils works >> out where the user site-packages folder is), but it is a 'maintenance only' >> fix. >> > > But it's still a change in semantics. Tossing this into 2.6 would mean that > anyone who has worked around the current behaviour is going to have a busted > install. > > -Brett > >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
