[llvm-dev] Python 2 compatibility for utility scripts

[Nico Weber via llvm-dev]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:15 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:55 PM Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:41 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It sounds like you ran into a bug in the test infrastructure's code to
>>> determine if python3 is supported. Fixing that might be harder, but it only
>>> needs to be fixed once no matter how much more python3 development there
>>> will be.
>>>
>>
>> No, it was in some local.lit.cfg.
>>
>
> I see that now. Sure, in that case I suggest to fix whatever the issue is *and
> move* it to common code, so that the "python3" feature is correctly
> detected and available to any test.
>
> Right now, most of our scripts were originally written for python 2, so
>>> certainly it's easy for them to support python 2. But, it was a lot of work
>>> by various people to port them all to additionally work in python 3. And,
>>> in the future (or maybe even now), people will be generally be writing
>>> python3 scripts by default rather than python2. Certainly they ought to.
>>>
>>> I just don't think it's worthwhile to require all new such scripts to
>>> continue to be written bilingually, unless doing that extra work helps to
>>> serve users.
>>>
>>> I'm not at all worried about a hypothetical case where we want to ship a
>>> script that was written for python3 only. Firstly, because that usually
>>> doesn't happen. But if it does, we can port it then, or else we might just
>>> decide it's fine for it to be python3 only.
>>>
>>
>> You don't see any advantage to having a consistent language level across
>> the project? (See also the flang vs c++17 discussion.)
>>
>
> In this particular situatoin, correct. For these auxilliary scripts which
> are not released or used to build/test released components, I see no
> advantage to requiring these to support python2, anymore.
>

Well, I disagree :)

I'm curious what others think.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191217/eebc58e3/attachment.html>