[Piglit] [ANNOUNCE] python 3 is here... and python 2 is staying

[Dylan Baker]

Quoting Ilia Mirkin (2016-02-09 11:35:14)
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Quoting Matt Turner (2016-02-09 10:03:59)
> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Quoting Matt Turner (2016-02-08 21:06:58)
> >> >>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dylan.c at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> > I just pushed patches to hybridize the framework to use either python
> >> >>> > 3.3+ or 2.7.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Everything should keep working as normal. Unless you have python 3.x,
> >> >>> > then you'll need to rerun CMake to pick up the changes.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> There's still a handful of *.py files with #!/usr/bin/env python2:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> generated_tests/random_ubo-arb_uniform_buffer_object.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> generated_tests/random_ubo.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> generated_tests/random_ubo_trim.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> piglit-print-commands.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> piglit-resume.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> piglit-run.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> piglit-summary-html.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> piglit-summary.py:#!/usr/bin/env python2
> >> >>> self-tests/test-installed-piglit-script-imports-correct-framework-module:#!/usr/bin/env
> >> >>> python2
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I thought I'd mentioned that in the commit, but apparently I did only in
> >> >> the cover letter.
> >> >>
> >> >> The random_ubo_stuff is not plugged into anything at the moment, and I
> >> >> have a WIP branch for those, but getting the same output from python 2
> >> >> and python 3 for generators without numpy is tricky.
> >> >>
> >> >> The piglit-* command were left intentionally. They're legacy interfaces
> >> >> and we don't add new ones when adding new functions to the 'piglit'
> >> >> command (piglit summary aggregate, for example). Personally, I'd rather
> >> >> get rid of them (other than print-commands, which I should probably
> >> >> update).
> >> >
> >> > Really? I think it's a lot more straightforward to use them than the
> >> > "piglit" megarunner thing... not sure why that was added tbh. But
> >> > since the regular commands stayed, I didn't object at the time. Should
> >> > I have?
> >>
> >> Yeah, I've continued using the piglit-run.py/piglit-summary.py
> >> scripts. I don't know what I would gain by switching, but I would lose
> >> the ability to tab complete their names. :)
> >
> > One of these days I should really finish writing those zsh and bash
> > completions I started, and then got frustrated by how difficult it is to
> > write bash and zsh completions....
> 
> FWIW my experience is that, while very cool and high "aaaah" factor,
> bash completions greatly degrade the usability of bash. I never enable
> them on my own systems. For example it breaks completion with the tar
> command on annarchy -- I haven't figured out how to turn them off but
> every time it's a huge pain that I can't tab-complete the name of a
> tar archive because it doesn't know about .xz or something.
> 
>   -ilia

Well, annarchy is running debian stale... 

fwiw, they're sourced out of
/usr/share/bash_completions/bash_completion, though I'm sure they're
included in /etc/profile so they may be somewhat hard to remove the link
on a machine you don't administer.

Anecdotally, I find the opposite, not having completions is maddening.
so, to each his own I guess.

Dylan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/piglit/attachments/20160209/2169c120/attachment.sig>