| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, James Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Python 3.0 does not work with PL/Python |
| Date: | 2009-05-29 01:06:14 |
| Message-ID: | 4A1F3506.9030703@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian escribió:
>
>> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday 06 April 2009 02:10:59 James Pye wrote:
>>>
>>>> Any thoughts on the acceptability of a complete rewrite for Python 3?
>>>>
>>> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html
>>>
>> You usually have to rewrite when you have not done refactoring as part
>> of development; PGDG does refactoring regularly.
>>
>
> Except that plpython stagnates, save for minor hacks here and there.
>
Does Python 3 have some sort of usable sandbox that would mean we could
have a trusted plpython?
Otherwise, I'm not too keen simply to throw Python 2.x overboard until
it's no longer common on platforms people are likely to want to install
Postgres on, if that's what's implied by the original question.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-05-29 01:08:23 | Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2009-05-29 01:03:21 | Re: pg_migrator and an 8.3-compatible tsvector data type |