Re: Python 3.1 support

On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 12:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 12:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Yes. That's exactly what I was complaining about upthread. I'm not
> >> a Python user, but from what I can gather of the 2-to-3 changes,
> >> having to choose one at package build time is going to be a disaster.
>
> > Agreed. We really need to have a plpython and plpython3.
>
> Peter was concerned about duplicative maintenance effort, but what I
> think this patch shows is that (at least for the near future) both
> could be built from a single source file. What we need is configure
> and makefile support to do that.

Ahh, so we would have:

--enable-plpython2=/usr/bin/python2
--enable-plpython3=/usr/bin/python3

?

That seems reasonable if we can run both. Although I wonder if longer
term (2.x is going to be support a long time) we will end up with
frustration within the single source file trying to keep things
straight.

Joshua D. Drake

>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
If the world pushes look it in the eye and GRR. Then push back harder. - Salamander