when will python 2.5 take in mainstream?

[Eric CHAO]

A lot of application based on python claim that python 2.3 or 2.4 is
needed not 2.5, ie. mysqldb. I've been using python for months. I
don't care about 2.4 or 2.5. But I like the default icons of python in
2.5. So I just use that, but some scripts can't work on that.

When will all these applications support 2.5?

Thanks.

 

[Steven Bethard]

A lot of application based on python claim that python 2.3 or 2.4 is
needed not 2.5, ie. mysqldb. I've been using python for months. I
don't care about 2.4 or 2.5. But I like the default icons of python in
2.5. So I just use that, but some scripts can't work on that.

When will all these applications support 2.5?

Many applications that require 2.3 or 2.4 work fine in 2.5. Did you try
mysqldb and have it fail?

Steve

 

[Dennis Lee Bieber]

When will all these applications support 2.5?

cynical answer: when you download the sources and build them against
the 2.5 headers

In the case of MySQLdb, one problem is that, as I recall, the
primary author does not have a Windows compatible build environment and
essentially relies upon others doing the Linux port to Windows and
releasing pre-built installers.
--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG
(e-mail address removed) (e-mail address removed)
HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/
(Bestiaria Support Staff: (e-mail address removed))
HTTP://www.bestiaria.com/

 

[tleeuwenburg]

When they have to ...

One of the big things about Python is that its penetration slows it
down. There's more legacy code and interdependant systems around now
that Python is more successful and more mature.

Here's a thought -- perhaps it would be worth having some good ways to
interact with Python from Python. Suppose you have some 2.4 code
someplace, interacting with your mysqldb or whatever, and you don't
want to rewrite it. So long as you have some kind of object broker,
you could (plausibly) leave your 2.4 apps running with the old
interpreter, but wrap them for Python 2.5 and use that in your new
development.

Ditto 3.0.

Rather than having to re-write every interacting component, maybe it
could be straightforward to all Python2.4 from Python2.5 to execute
particular library calls. I'm not an expert, I don't know how you'd
build such a system, but I do know that re-writing stuff is a real
pain.

Perhaps APIs for 2.5 and 3.0 could have a special version flag, and if
not present or not compatible, a 2.4 interpreter could be called
instead...

Cheers,
-T

 

[Laurent Pointal]

(e-mail address removed) a écrit :

When they have to ...

One of the big things about Python is that its penetration slows it
down. There's more legacy code and interdependant systems around now
that Python is more successful and more mature.

Here's a thought -- perhaps it would be worth having some good ways to
interact with Python from Python. Suppose you have some 2.4 code
someplace, interacting with your mysqldb or whatever, and you don't
want to rewrite it. So long as you have some kind of object broker,
you could (plausibly) leave your 2.4 apps running with the old
interpreter, but wrap them for Python 2.5 and use that in your new
development.

KISS please.

Ditto 3.0.

Rather than having to re-write every interacting component, maybe it
could be straightforward to all Python2.4 from Python2.5 to execute
particular library calls. I'm not an expert, I don't know how you'd
build such a system, but I do know that re-writing stuff is a real
pain.

Most of Python 2.4 source code is compatible with Python 2.5. Problems
come with native compiled modules, you must have those for you 2.X
Python version - some times just a compilation is enough.

For Python 3.0, AFAIK its a big rewrite and developers know that it will
be uncompatible in large parts with existing code.

Perhaps APIs for 2.5 and 3.0 could have a special version flag, and if
not present or not compatible, a 2.4 interpreter could be called
instead...

Making Python interpreter bigger and more complex.
Some code already has "hacks", trying to import a newer module and
installing a fallback if its not available.

If really your old Python 2.4 software cant run under Python 2.5, then
you can have both Python 2.4 and 2.5 installed and running some code.
Setup Pyro [1] on both, and go throught remote object invocation.
And if you dont need new Python 2.5 stuff in your code evolution, just
stay with 2.4, it works well.


A+

Laurent.

[1] http://pyro.sourceforge.net/

 

[Steven Bethard]

For Python 3.0, AFAIK its a big rewrite and developers know that it will
be uncompatible in large parts with existing code.

Wrong on both counts. ;-) Python 3.0 is not a rewrite. It's based on the
same code base as the 2.X line, but with a lot of the old deprecated
things removed. And, while Python 3.0 is allowing itself to break
backwards compatibility, at least that the Python level, it should be
largely compatible with the 2.X line. There will be some breakages, but
(1) they shouldn't be too extensive and (2) there will be utilities to
help you update your code. In many cases, it will be possible to write
code that works in both Python 2.X and 3.0.

STeVe

 

[Laurent Pointal]

Steven Bethard a écrit :

Wrong on both counts. ;-) Python 3.0 is not a rewrite. It's based on the
same code base as the 2.X line, but with a lot of the old deprecated
things removed. And, while Python 3.0 is allowing itself to break
backwards compatibility, at least that the Python level, it should be
largely compatible with the 2.X line. There will be some breakages, but
(1) they shouldn't be too extensive and (2) there will be utilities to
help you update your code. In many cases, it will be possible to write
code that works in both Python 2.X and 3.0.

STeVe

Hum my brain just mix 3 and 3000. Sorry, just a factor 1000.