26
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 34:
Line 34: − + + + + + + + + + +
Summer of Code/2014/Proposal to port sugar core to python3 (view source)
Revision as of 17:05, 20 March 2014
, 17:05, 20 March 2014no edit summary
I grepped for imports on both sugar and sugar-toolkit-gtk3. A few of the modules have been renamed/relocated in python 3, but all of them are available, except for telepathy-python which as I have already said, I will be porting in the coming week.
I grepped for imports on both sugar and sugar-toolkit-gtk3. A few of the modules have been renamed/relocated in python 3, but all of them are available, except for telepathy-python which as I have already said, I will be porting in the coming week.
My project would introduce no new features at all, but it would make sugar future ready and also backwards compatible. It might make development/maintenance harder on the core libraries in the short term, because the developers would need to understand the polyglot written using six. But it would provide long-term benefits and a wider potential future developer reach.
Something like
import six
from six.moves import configparser
from six.moves import html_parser
from six.moves import xmlrpc_client
would import configparser, htmlparser and xmlrpc client(which are some of the modules that I found were relocated in python 3) in both python 2 and 3.
Of course just try, except blocks will work just the same, but that code would just feel hacky and ugly. Not to mention that six provides a whole host of other [https://pythonhosted.org/six/ features] than just wrap around relocated libraries.
My project would introduce no new features at all, but it would make sugar future ready and also backwards compatible. It might actually make development/maintenance harder on the core libraries in the short term, because the developers would need to understand the polyglot written using six or ad-hoc polyglot. But it would provide long-term benefits and a wider potential future developer reach.