[LLVMdev] Minimum Python Version

Joshua Cranmer pidgeot18 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 13:53:40 PST 2012

On 12/3/2012 3:09 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> Yes, actually, I did -- it boils down to: it's old, and Python 3 is 
> coming

Python 3.x is being made the default version of python on some systems, 
so getting python 2.x/3.x concurrent compatibility will probably be 
imminently needed. From experience, Python 2.4/Python 3.x concurrent 
compatibility is just plain impossible.

Also, I will point out that arguing that since RHEL 5 still uses 2.4 
means we should keep our default at 2.4 is mildly specious, since 
running Clang on RHEL 5 has required, in my experience, several 
environment augmentations, most notably because the libc headers there 
won't compile in C99 mode, and I would be surprised if Clang is properly 
built by the default version of gcc there.

> No current problems other than a speculative unicode issue are raised

I don't know any hard examples off the top of my head, but I do 
definitely remember (while grepping through python docs earlier today) 
being surprised that some of the functions I use on a consistent basis 
turned out to have a minimum of python 2.6.

Joshua Cranmer
News submodule owner
DXR coauthor

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list