Aahz aahz at pythoncraft.com
Tue Dec 18 12:09:58 EST 2007

• Previous message (by thread): More than one interpreter per process?
• Next message (by thread): More than one interpreter per process?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

In article <224c0c36-0524-478b-a3ab-689e5f0a7e9f at i72g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
sturlamolden  <sturlamolden at yahoo.no> wrote:
>On 18 Des, 10:24, Roger Binns <rog... at rogerbinns.com> wrote:
>> 
>> You would have more luck getting this sort of change into Python 3 since
>> that requires most extension modules to be modified a bit (eg to deal
>> with string and unicode issues).
>
>PEPs are closed for Python 3.

That's true for core interpreter changes and only applies to Python 3.0.
Overall, what Roger said is true: if there is any hope for your proposal,
you must ensure that you can make it happen in Python 3.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"Typing is cheap.  Thinking is expensive."  --Roy Smith

---

• Previous message (by thread): More than one interpreter per process?
• Next message (by thread): More than one interpreter per process?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-list mailing list