Repository navigation
Python3 port for SCL library? #407
Description
Hi all,
I've been using the SCL library embedded in exp2python (link to source) to good effect for some IFC-based experiments. SCL is currently written for Python 2.x. I have a need to use it in combination with some libraries that only support Python 3.x. If I were to submit a PR adding Python3 support for SCL, is it better to:
- Port SCL directly to Python3, given that Python2 is sunset (source)
- Use something like Python-Future to support simultaneous Python2 and Python3 compatibility?
Another way to ask this might be: Do we have good reason to continue to maintain Python2 support for SCL?
Thanks!
Activity
tpaviot commentedon May 8, 2021
I choose 1. The only reason I see to maintain a Python2 version would be that someone here raises his hand and ask for this support. I guess it won't happen.
cshorler commentedon May 8, 2021
brlcad commentedon May 10, 2021
Yeah, I would say Py3. If someone wants to backport and maintain support for Py2, I don't think I'd object, but priority would be making sure Py3 works well once it's converted.
devonsparks commentedon May 15, 2021
Thanks all. I've made most of the changes required for a Py3 port (testing now - PR coming soon 🤞). I figured it was a good time to update the setuptools configuration so the package can properly self-install along with its dependencies. This would also let us publish the package to PyPI.
Any thoughts on renaming the Python SCL package to something like
stepcodeorpystepcode? This would reduce ambiguity when published to a package repository like PyPI and bring the naming convention in line with the rest of the project. I didn't see other parts of stepcode depending on the Python SCL library, so the rename appears harmless, but wanted to check. If we're unsure, I can send a PR with the existing SCL naming convention, and we can return to this later.Thanks!
cshorler commentedon Apr 23, 2023
this has been implemented and merged to develop
#408 and #429 and others