2018-05-15 03:13:16 +00:00
|
|
|
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
|
|
|
|
|
<!DOCTYPE dita PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DITA Composite//EN" "ditabase.dtd">
|
2018-05-15 03:50:14 +00:00
|
|
|
<dita xml:lang="en-GB">
|
2018-05-15 03:13:16 +00:00
|
|
|
<topic id="topic_j1r_qmx_5db">
|
|
|
|
|
<title>Python 2 vs. Python 3</title>
|
|
|
|
|
<body>
|
|
|
|
|
<p>Though the GPGME Python bindings themselves provide support for both Python 2 and 3,
|
|
|
|
|
the focus is unequivocally on Python 3 and specifically from Python 3.4 and above. As a
|
|
|
|
|
consequence all the examples and instructions in this guide use Python 3 code.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
<p>Much of it will work with Python 2, but much of it also deals with Python 3 byte literals,
|
|
|
|
|
particularly when reading and writing data. Developers concentrating on Python 2.7, and
|
|
|
|
|
possibly even 2.6, will need to make the appropriate modifications to support the older
|
|
|
|
|
string and unicode types as opposed to bytes.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
<p>There are multiple reasons for concentrating on Python 3; some of which relate to the
|
|
|
|
|
immediate integration of these bindings, some of which relate to longer term plans for both
|
|
|
|
|
GPGME and the python bindings and some of which relate to the impending EOL period for
|
|
|
|
|
Python 2.7. Essentially, though, there is little value in tying the bindings to a version of
|
|
|
|
|
the language which is a dead end and the advantages offered by Python 3 over Python 2 make
|
|
|
|
|
handling the data types with which GPGME deals considerably easier.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
</body>
|
|
|
|
|
</topic>
|
|
|
|
|
</dita>
|
