| From: |
| "Eric S. Raymond" <esr-AT-thyrsus.com> |
| To: |
| Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc-AT-gmail.com> |
| Subject: |
| Re: [RFC] Adding Python as a possible language and it's usage |
| Date: |
| Wed, 18 Jul 2018 08:06:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID: |
| <20180718120625.GA19628@thyrsus.com> |
| Cc: |
| David Malcolm <dmalcolm-AT-redhat.com>, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther-AT-gmail.com>, Martin =?utf-8?B?TGnFoWth?= <mliska-AT-suse.cz>, "gcc-AT-gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-AT-gcc.gnu.org> |
| Archive-link: |
| Article |
Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 at 11:56, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Python 2.6 onwards is broadly compatible with Python 3.*. and is about
> > to be 10 years old. (IIRC it was the system python implementation in
> > RHEL 6).
>
> It is indeed. Without some regular testing with Python 2.6 it could be
> easy to introduce code that doesn't actually work on that old version.
> I did that recently, see PR 86112.
>
> This isn't an objection to using Python (I like it, and anyway I don't
> touch the parts of GCC that you're talking about using it for). Just a
> caution that trying to restrict yourself to a portable subset isn't
> always easy for casual users of a language (also a problem with C++98
> vs C++11 vs C++14 as I'm sure many GCC devs are aware).
It's not very difficult to write "polyglot" Python that is indifferent
to which version it runs under. I had to solve this problem for
reposurgeon; techniques documented here...
http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/practical-python-porting/
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org
Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.
