I strongly dislike Python 3
in [Python]
|
From: Stefan Behnel on 28 Jun 2010 03:55 Stefan Reich, 26.06.2010 17:59: > This has probably been talked about on your lists, but I wasn't part of > that discussion. "I don't care to read up old arguments in one of the archives" isn't a very convincing reason to start a discussion. Stefan
From: Tim Golden on 28 Jun 2010 04:10 On 28/06/2010 00:03, Eric_Dexter(a)msn.com wrote: > It should be easier to have a large number of python versions on one > machine... I am realy fond of 2.5 so I am probily going to start > compiling them or just include the python2.5 exe if I port stuff and > settle it that way.. I have Python versions 2.1-2.7 and 3.0-3.2 installed on my Windows box without any problems. I don't often have to use the full range (mostly, in fact, for confirming that my unit tests still run on my few released modules). But I certainly do use several different ones each day where I have to make sure I'm running the same version as the user who's experiencing a problem. One technique I find particularly handy is to create a pythonxx.exe hardlink in my c:\tools (which is always on my path), pointing to c:\pythonxx\python.exe in turn. Then it's just a matter of: python25 my-script.py Even without that, it's only a question of c:\python25\python my-script.py if I need to. I have in the past used a crude shebang-alike Python pre-processor which hands off to the right version. It's a bit sluggish, though, and that outweighed for me the slight convenience. YMMV TJG
From: John Bokma on 28 Jun 2010 04:23 geremy condra <debatem1(a)gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 10:35 PM, John Bokma <john(a)castleamber.com> wrote: [..] >> I've used several operating systems over many years and each OS has its >> own issues. I am currently using mostly Linux and it's far from the >> flawless OS some people seem to think it is. While it's true that some >> things are easier on OS A than on OS B changing your operating system >> because one (minor) thing "doesn't work" is often not an option. > > Sure, linux has its flaws- but it does include a working shell OOTB, which > is what raised this question in the first place. As mentioned already by someone else, install bash on Windows and problem solved (it can be installed without Cygwin). >> On top of that, I don't think it's that hard to make a small program >> that one associates with .py files which checks the first line and feeds >> the .py to the correct version of Python based on the information in the >> aformentioned first line. > > I could spend my time reinventing all kinds of wheels. I'm just not sure > why I'd want to. It's clear that you are not interested in running Windows. But the world is not limited to what you want. There are people out there who are /not/ interested to switch to a different OS just because it's the easiest option to /you/. >> Another option (instead of installing a better shell) might be to make >> several VMs, each with their own Python version. Run subversion (or any >> other version control system) on your host, and you can test whatever >> you want. > > Is this seriously your solution? Sure it is. Maybe not for you, but there are people who prefer an isolated VM to test stuff in some cases. I am one of them. > Can you see why I would rather have a > working shell than have to automate test suites across a half dozen > VMs? Install bash in that case, problem solved. Yet another solution is to have your test suite change the file association for the .py (and related) extensions to the correct version of Python. I know it's not for you, you're happy on Linux, but for others this might work perfectly. >> There are plenty of people who are very happy with coding under an MS >> OS. I now and then miss those days :-). > > Ok, and for those people things like cygwin exist. My point is just that it > is frequently easier to do an actual linux install. Maybe in your specific case, sure. But /again/ there are plenty of people who use Windows /for a reason/. Why would one change an entire operation system just to have bash? It's not needed. On top of that, I have installed Cygwin and used it for a while, and don't see why installing Linux is easier. Especially if a majority of the other programs I want to use don't run under Wine / don't have alternatives on Linux (alternative as in a suitable alternative for /my/ needs). -- John Bokma j3b Hacking & Hiking in Mexico - http://johnbokma.com/ http://castleamber.com/ - Perl & Python Development
From: John Bokma on 28 Jun 2010 04:26 Stephen Hansen <me+list/python(a)ixokai.io> writes: > On 6/27/10 7:35 PM, John Bokma wrote: >> On top of that, I don't think it's that hard to make a small program >> that one associates with .py files which checks the first line and feeds >> the .py to the correct version of Python based on the information in the >> aformentioned first line. > > http://effbot.org/zone/exemaker.htm does approximately that and has > been very useful for me. Thanks for the link. -- John Bokma j3b Hacking & Hiking in Mexico - http://johnbokma.com/ http://castleamber.com/ - Perl & Python Development
From: John Bokma on 28 Jun 2010 04:29
Tim Golden <mail(a)timgolden.me.uk> writes: > On 28/06/2010 00:03, Eric_Dexter(a)msn.com wrote: >> It should be easier to have a large number of python versions on one >> machine... I am realy fond of 2.5 so I am probily going to start >> compiling them or just include the python2.5 exe if I port stuff and >> settle it that way.. > > I have Python versions 2.1-2.7 and 3.0-3.2 installed on my Windows > box without any problems. I don't often have to use the full range > (mostly, in fact, for confirming that my unit tests still run on > my few released modules). But I certainly do use several different > ones each day where I have to make sure I'm running the same version > as the user who's experiencing a problem. > > One technique I find particularly handy is to create a pythonxx.exe > hardlink in my c:\tools (which is always on my path), pointing to > c:\pythonxx\python.exe in turn. Then it's just a matter of: python25 > my-script.py > Even without that, it's only a question of c:\python25\python my-script.py > if I need to. > > I have in the past used a crude shebang-alike Python pre-processor > which hands off to the right version. It's a bit sluggish, though, > and that outweighed for me the slight convenience. YMMV You might want to look into the assoc command to (temporarily) associate ..py & co with a different version of Python. -- John Bokma j3b Hacking & Hiking in Mexico - http://johnbokma.com/ http://castleamber.com/ - Perl & Python Development |