May I humbly suggest using IronPython as a first baby step?
It has the same syntax as CPython 2.6/2.7, but ALL text strings are in
unicode, just like in Python 3.x. 8-bit byte arrays must be declared
as such. I suspect that about half of the problems with Python 3
conversion will be in that very
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 5:05 PM, VernonCole wrote:
> "Once we're at a Django 2.6 minimum supported version, using 2to3 to
> maintain
> parallel implementations becomes a lot easier."
>
> As much as I admire Russ, and I do, I don't think that the above
> statement is correct.
My apologies -- in the
Thanks everybody!
while indeed it's clear django will not official run on 3.0 any soon,
it's clearer to me why & how.
yes I'm aware of __future__ import, though it's not really magic (eg.
support for bytes / unicode types is more of a compatibility thing,
for argparse python 2.7 minimum is necess
"Once we're at a Django 2.6 minimum supported version, using 2to3 to
maintain
parallel implementations becomes a lot easier."
As much as I admire Russ, and I do, I don't think that the above
statement is correct.
For a short time on the pywin32 team we tried to "maintain parallel
implementations"
The RHEL/Python 2.4 question was addressed at length not more than a
month ago:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_frm/thread/b7390024b28a694d/f72c272152e968d7
Russell's reply there spells it out as clearly as anyone will be able
to right now...
All the best,
- Gabriel
It is actually so that with using __future__ and >=2.6 you already have
most of the things available from Python 3 e.g. print() rather than
print. See table at the bottom of
http://docs.python.org/dev/library/__future__.html#module-__future__
Sure, everybody is raving about Python 3 but 2.6 bein
And let's not forget the ol' Python Imaging Library.
By the way, does it bother anybody else that the home page of PIL says
"A version of 1.1.7 for 3.X will be released later" and the date for
1.1.7 is November 15, 2009?
On Sep 2, 9:45 am, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Ru
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
...
> Effectively, this means that official support for Django under Python
> 3 is still a couple of years away.
Fortunately, there is plenty to do preparing for this glorious day --
many commonly-used libraries which Django depends on di
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:34 PM, stefanoC wrote:
> bumping an already old question, is django going to run on python
> 3.x ?
>
> I found a few discussions talking about this, eg. and
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/f8c747a26aa5d8ed/0749bfa
bumping an already old question, is django going to run on python
3.x ?
I found a few discussions talking about this, eg. and
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/f8c747a26aa5d8ed/0749bfa67b47c802
and
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers
10 matches
Mail list logo
