So, I just tried, and basically it's difficult to make progress due to the print statements (since they induce an immediate syntax error). Since 2.4 doesn't support `from __future__ import print_function`, the only alternative I guess is shimming in a print function. This is a maintenance effort that I don't want to do right now (and, TBQH, I feel that the proper maintainer should be responsible for). ddunbar, how does this weight against your "causing large problems with the code" criterion for supporting older versions? As I believe that you are the author and maintainer of lit, are you planning on fixing this compatibility problem? -- Sean Silva On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote:> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> Why don't you give it a try. This will also help us to understand where >> the biggest >> problems are and if the necessary changes make supporting python 2.4 >> hard. > > I'll see what I can do. Since on that machine I only have python3 and > python2.7, I can't easily verify that my changes still operate on the > desired 2.4 and 2.5. > > -- Sean Silva
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 12:15:20PM -0500, Sean Silva wrote:> So, I just tried, and basically it's difficult to make progress due to > the print statements (since they induce an immediate syntax error). > Since 2.4 doesn't support `from __future__ import print_function`, the > only alternative I guess is shimming in a print function. This is a > maintenance effort that I don't want to do right now (and, TBQH, I > feel that the proper maintainer should be responsible for).I don't see any real point in adding pain for the sake of Python 3 support. It is essentially a different language. Joerg
Hi Sean, If there was a concrete need to move to a newer Python version in order to make lit Python 3 compatible, I would view that as a good reason to move forward. I have little experience writing Python 2 & 3 compatible code, so I'd need to see the patch to make lit Python 3 compatible before I could comment more. - Daniel On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote:> So, I just tried, and basically it's difficult to make progress due to > the print statements (since they induce an immediate syntax error). > Since 2.4 doesn't support `from __future__ import print_function`, the > only alternative I guess is shimming in a print function. This is a > maintenance effort that I don't want to do right now (and, TBQH, I > feel that the proper maintainer should be responsible for). > > ddunbar, how does this weight against your "causing large problems > with the code" criterion for supporting older versions? As I believe > that you are the author and maintainer of lit, are you planning on > fixing this compatibility problem? > > -- Sean Silva > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> > wrote: > >> Why don't you give it a try. This will also help us to understand where > >> the biggest > >> problems are and if the necessary changes make supporting python 2.4 > >> hard. > > > > I'll see what I can do. Since on that machine I only have python3 and > > python2.7, I can't easily verify that my changes still operate on the > > desired 2.4 and 2.5. > > > > -- Sean Silva >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121204/f855cc3b/attachment.html>
> If there was a concrete need to move to a newer Python version in order to > make lit Python 3 compatible, I would view that as a good reason to move > forward.The concrete need is that users on platforms which ship with Python 3 by default have to put in a workaround (install python2 and patch their $PATH) just to run the test suite. Off the top of my head I know this includes Ubuntu 12.10 and Arch Linux. -- Sean Silva On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org> wrote:> Hi Sean, > > If there was a concrete need to move to a newer Python version in order to > make lit Python 3 compatible, I would view that as a good reason to move > forward. > > I have little experience writing Python 2 & 3 compatible code, so I'd need > to see the patch to make lit Python 3 compatible before I could comment > more. > > - Daniel > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >> >> So, I just tried, and basically it's difficult to make progress due to >> the print statements (since they induce an immediate syntax error). >> Since 2.4 doesn't support `from __future__ import print_function`, the >> only alternative I guess is shimming in a print function. This is a >> maintenance effort that I don't want to do right now (and, TBQH, I >> feel that the proper maintainer should be responsible for). >> >> ddunbar, how does this weight against your "causing large problems >> with the code" criterion for supporting older versions? As I believe >> that you are the author and maintainer of lit, are you planning on >> fixing this compatibility problem? >> >> -- Sean Silva >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> >> > wrote: >> >> Why don't you give it a try. This will also help us to understand where >> >> the biggest >> >> problems are and if the necessary changes make supporting python 2.4 >> >> hard. >> > >> > I'll see what I can do. Since on that machine I only have python3 and >> > python2.7, I can't easily verify that my changes still operate on the >> > desired 2.4 and 2.5. >> > >> > -- Sean Silva > >