mirror of
				https://github.com/python/cpython.git
				synced 2025-10-31 10:26:02 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	 f79547a429
			
		
	
	
		f79547a429
		
			
		
	
	
	
	
		
			
			If an HTTP link is redirected to a same looking HTTPS link, the latter can be used directly without changes in readability and behavior. It protects from a men-in-the-middle attack. This change does not affect Python examples.
		
			
				
	
	
		
			454 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			22 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			454 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			22 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
| .. _pyporting-howto:
 | |
| 
 | |
| *********************************
 | |
| Porting Python 2 Code to Python 3
 | |
| *********************************
 | |
| 
 | |
| :author: Brett Cannon
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. topic:: Abstract
 | |
| 
 | |
|    With Python 3 being the future of Python while Python 2 is still in active
 | |
|    use, it is good to have your project available for both major releases of
 | |
|    Python. This guide is meant to help you figure out how best to support both
 | |
|    Python 2 & 3 simultaneously.
 | |
| 
 | |
|    If you are looking to port an extension module instead of pure Python code,
 | |
|    please see :ref:`cporting-howto`.
 | |
| 
 | |
|    If you would like to read one core Python developer's take on why Python 3
 | |
|    came into existence, you can read Nick Coghlan's `Python 3 Q & A`_ or
 | |
|    Brett Cannon's `Why Python 3 exists`_.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
|    For help with porting, you can view the archived python-porting_ mailing list.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The Short Explanation
 | |
| =====================
 | |
| 
 | |
| To make your project be single-source Python 2/3 compatible, the basic steps
 | |
| are:
 | |
| 
 | |
| #. Only worry about supporting Python 2.7
 | |
| #. Make sure you have good test coverage (coverage.py_ can help;
 | |
|    ``python -m pip install coverage``)
 | |
| #. Learn the differences between Python 2 & 3
 | |
| #. Use Futurize_ (or Modernize_) to update your code (e.g. ``python -m pip install future``)
 | |
| #. Use Pylint_ to help make sure you don't regress on your Python 3 support
 | |
|    (``python -m pip install pylint``)
 | |
| #. Use caniusepython3_ to find out which of your dependencies are blocking your
 | |
|    use of Python 3 (``python -m pip install caniusepython3``)
 | |
| #. Once your dependencies are no longer blocking you, use continuous integration
 | |
|    to make sure you stay compatible with Python 2 & 3 (tox_ can help test
 | |
|    against multiple versions of Python; ``python -m pip install tox``)
 | |
| #. Consider using optional static type checking to make sure your type usage
 | |
|    works in both Python 2 & 3 (e.g. use mypy_ to check your typing under both
 | |
|    Python 2 & Python 3; ``python -m pip install mypy``).
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. note::
 | |
| 
 | |
|    Note: Using ``python -m pip install`` guarantees that the ``pip`` you invoke
 | |
|    is the one installed for the Python currently in use, whether it be
 | |
|    a system-wide ``pip`` or one installed within a
 | |
|    :ref:`virtual environment <tut-venv>`.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Details
 | |
| =======
 | |
| 
 | |
| A key point about supporting Python 2 & 3 simultaneously is that you can start
 | |
| **today**! Even if your dependencies are not supporting Python 3 yet that does
 | |
| not mean you can't modernize your code **now** to support Python 3. Most changes
 | |
| required to support Python 3 lead to cleaner code using newer practices even in
 | |
| Python 2 code.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Another key point is that modernizing your Python 2 code to also support
 | |
| Python 3 is largely automated for you. While you might have to make some API
 | |
| decisions thanks to Python 3 clarifying text data versus binary data, the
 | |
| lower-level work is now mostly done for you and thus can at least benefit from
 | |
| the automated changes immediately.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Keep those key points in mind while you read on about the details of porting
 | |
| your code to support Python 2 & 3 simultaneously.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Drop support for Python 2.6 and older
 | |
| -------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| While you can make Python 2.5 work with Python 3, it is **much** easier if you
 | |
| only have to work with Python 2.7. If dropping Python 2.5 is not an
 | |
| option then the six_ project can help you support Python 2.5 & 3 simultaneously
 | |
| (``python -m pip install six``). Do realize, though, that nearly all the projects listed
 | |
| in this HOWTO will not be available to you.
 | |
| 
 | |
| If you are able to skip Python 2.5 and older, then the required changes
 | |
| to your code should continue to look and feel like idiomatic Python code. At
 | |
| worst you will have to use a function instead of a method in some instances or
 | |
| have to import a function instead of using a built-in one, but otherwise the
 | |
| overall transformation should not feel foreign to you.
 | |
| 
 | |
| But you should aim for only supporting Python 2.7. Python 2.6 is no longer
 | |
| freely supported and thus is not receiving bugfixes. This means **you** will have
 | |
| to work around any issues you come across with Python 2.6. There are also some
 | |
| tools mentioned in this HOWTO which do not support Python 2.6 (e.g., Pylint_),
 | |
| and this will become more commonplace as time goes on. It will simply be easier
 | |
| for you if you only support the versions of Python that you have to support.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Make sure you specify the proper version support in your ``setup.py`` file
 | |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| In your ``setup.py`` file you should have the proper `trove classifier`_
 | |
| specifying what versions of Python you support. As your project does not support
 | |
| Python 3 yet you should at least have
 | |
| ``Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only`` specified. Ideally you should
 | |
| also specify each major/minor version of Python that you do support, e.g.
 | |
| ``Programming Language :: Python :: 2.7``.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Have good test coverage
 | |
| -----------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once you have your code supporting the oldest version of Python 2 you want it
 | |
| to, you will want to make sure your test suite has good coverage. A good rule of
 | |
| thumb is that if you want to be confident enough in your test suite that any
 | |
| failures that appear after having tools rewrite your code are actual bugs in the
 | |
| tools and not in your code. If you want a number to aim for, try to get over 80%
 | |
| coverage (and don't feel bad if you find it hard to get better than 90%
 | |
| coverage). If you don't already have a tool to measure test coverage then
 | |
| coverage.py_ is recommended.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Learn the differences between Python 2 & 3
 | |
| -------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once you have your code well-tested you are ready to begin porting your code to
 | |
| Python 3! But to fully understand how your code is going to change and what
 | |
| you want to look out for while you code, you will want to learn what changes
 | |
| Python 3 makes in terms of Python 2. Typically the two best ways of doing that
 | |
| is reading the :ref:`"What's New" <whatsnew-index>` doc for each release of Python 3 and the
 | |
| `Porting to Python 3`_ book (which is free online). There is also a handy
 | |
| `cheat sheet`_ from the Python-Future project.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Update your code
 | |
| ----------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once you feel like you know what is different in Python 3 compared to Python 2,
 | |
| it's time to update your code! You have a choice between two tools in porting
 | |
| your code automatically: Futurize_ and Modernize_. Which tool you choose will
 | |
| depend on how much like Python 3 you want your code to be. Futurize_ does its
 | |
| best to make Python 3 idioms and practices exist in Python 2, e.g. backporting
 | |
| the ``bytes`` type from Python 3 so that you have semantic parity between the
 | |
| major versions of Python. Modernize_,
 | |
| on the other hand, is more conservative and targets a Python 2/3 subset of
 | |
| Python, directly relying on six_ to help provide compatibility. As Python 3 is
 | |
| the future, it might be best to consider Futurize to begin adjusting to any new
 | |
| practices that Python 3 introduces which you are not accustomed to yet.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Regardless of which tool you choose, they will update your code to run under
 | |
| Python 3 while staying compatible with the version of Python 2 you started with.
 | |
| Depending on how conservative you want to be, you may want to run the tool over
 | |
| your test suite first and visually inspect the diff to make sure the
 | |
| transformation is accurate. After you have transformed your test suite and
 | |
| verified that all the tests still pass as expected, then you can transform your
 | |
| application code knowing that any tests which fail is a translation failure.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Unfortunately the tools can't automate everything to make your code work under
 | |
| Python 3 and so there are a handful of things you will need to update manually
 | |
| to get full Python 3 support (which of these steps are necessary vary between
 | |
| the tools). Read the documentation for the tool you choose to use to see what it
 | |
| fixes by default and what it can do optionally to know what will (not) be fixed
 | |
| for you and what you may have to fix on your own (e.g. using ``io.open()`` over
 | |
| the built-in ``open()`` function is off by default in Modernize). Luckily,
 | |
| though, there are only a couple of things to watch out for which can be
 | |
| considered large issues that may be hard to debug if not watched for.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Division
 | |
| ++++++++
 | |
| 
 | |
| In Python 3, ``5 / 2 == 2.5`` and not ``2``; all division between ``int`` values
 | |
| result in a ``float``. This change has actually been planned since Python 2.2
 | |
| which was released in 2002. Since then users have been encouraged to add
 | |
| ``from __future__ import division`` to any and all files which use the ``/`` and
 | |
| ``//`` operators or to be running the interpreter with the ``-Q`` flag. If you
 | |
| have not been doing this then you will need to go through your code and do two
 | |
| things:
 | |
| 
 | |
| #. Add ``from __future__ import division`` to your files
 | |
| #. Update any division operator as necessary to either use ``//`` to use floor
 | |
|    division or continue using ``/`` and expect a float
 | |
| 
 | |
| The reason that ``/`` isn't simply translated to ``//`` automatically is that if
 | |
| an object defines a ``__truediv__`` method but not ``__floordiv__`` then your
 | |
| code would begin to fail (e.g. a user-defined class that uses ``/`` to
 | |
| signify some operation but not ``//`` for the same thing or at all).
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Text versus binary data
 | |
| +++++++++++++++++++++++
 | |
| 
 | |
| In Python 2 you could use the ``str`` type for both text and binary data.
 | |
| Unfortunately this confluence of two different concepts could lead to brittle
 | |
| code which sometimes worked for either kind of data, sometimes not. It also
 | |
| could lead to confusing APIs if people didn't explicitly state that something
 | |
| that accepted ``str`` accepted either text or binary data instead of one
 | |
| specific type. This complicated the situation especially for anyone supporting
 | |
| multiple languages as APIs wouldn't bother explicitly supporting ``unicode``
 | |
| when they claimed text data support.
 | |
| 
 | |
| To make the distinction between text and binary data clearer and more
 | |
| pronounced, Python 3 did what most languages created in the age of the internet
 | |
| have done and made text and binary data distinct types that cannot blindly be
 | |
| mixed together (Python predates widespread access to the internet). For any code
 | |
| that deals only with text or only binary data, this separation doesn't pose an
 | |
| issue. But for code that has to deal with both, it does mean you might have to
 | |
| now care about when you are using text compared to binary data, which is why
 | |
| this cannot be entirely automated.
 | |
| 
 | |
| To start, you will need to decide which APIs take text and which take binary
 | |
| (it is **highly** recommended you don't design APIs that can take both due to
 | |
| the difficulty of keeping the code working; as stated earlier it is difficult to
 | |
| do well). In Python 2 this means making sure the APIs that take text can work
 | |
| with ``unicode`` and those that work with binary data work with the
 | |
| ``bytes`` type from Python 3 (which is a subset of ``str`` in Python 2 and acts
 | |
| as an alias for ``bytes`` type in Python 2). Usually the biggest issue is
 | |
| realizing which methods exist on which types in Python 2 & 3 simultaneously
 | |
| (for text that's ``unicode`` in Python 2 and ``str`` in Python 3, for binary
 | |
| that's ``str``/``bytes`` in Python 2 and ``bytes`` in Python 3). The following
 | |
| table lists the **unique** methods of each data type across Python 2 & 3
 | |
| (e.g., the ``decode()`` method is usable on the equivalent binary data type in
 | |
| either Python 2 or 3, but it can't be used by the textual data type consistently
 | |
| between Python 2 and 3 because ``str`` in Python 3 doesn't have the method). Do
 | |
| note that as of Python 3.5 the ``__mod__`` method was added to the bytes type.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ======================== =====================
 | |
| **Text data**            **Binary data**
 | |
| ------------------------ ---------------------
 | |
| \                        decode
 | |
| ------------------------ ---------------------
 | |
| encode
 | |
| ------------------------ ---------------------
 | |
| format
 | |
| ------------------------ ---------------------
 | |
| isdecimal
 | |
| ------------------------ ---------------------
 | |
| isnumeric
 | |
| ======================== =====================
 | |
| 
 | |
| Making the distinction easier to handle can be accomplished by encoding and
 | |
| decoding between binary data and text at the edge of your code. This means that
 | |
| when you receive text in binary data, you should immediately decode it. And if
 | |
| your code needs to send text as binary data then encode it as late as possible.
 | |
| This allows your code to work with only text internally and thus eliminates
 | |
| having to keep track of what type of data you are working with.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The next issue is making sure you know whether the string literals in your code
 | |
| represent text or binary data. You should add a ``b`` prefix to any
 | |
| literal that presents binary data. For text you should add a ``u`` prefix to
 | |
| the text literal. (there is a :mod:`__future__` import to force all unspecified
 | |
| literals to be Unicode, but usage has shown it isn't as effective as adding a
 | |
| ``b`` or ``u`` prefix to all literals explicitly)
 | |
| 
 | |
| As part of this dichotomy you also need to be careful about opening files.
 | |
| Unless you have been working on Windows, there is a chance you have not always
 | |
| bothered to add the ``b`` mode when opening a binary file (e.g., ``rb`` for
 | |
| binary reading).  Under Python 3, binary files and text files are clearly
 | |
| distinct and mutually incompatible; see the :mod:`io` module for details.
 | |
| Therefore, you **must** make a decision of whether a file will be used for
 | |
| binary access (allowing binary data to be read and/or written) or textual access
 | |
| (allowing text data to be read and/or written). You should also use :func:`io.open`
 | |
| for opening files instead of the built-in :func:`open` function as the :mod:`io`
 | |
| module is consistent from Python 2 to 3 while the built-in :func:`open` function
 | |
| is not (in Python 3 it's actually :func:`io.open`). Do not bother with the
 | |
| outdated practice of using :func:`codecs.open` as that's only necessary for
 | |
| keeping compatibility with Python 2.5.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The constructors of both ``str`` and ``bytes`` have different semantics for the
 | |
| same arguments between Python 2 & 3. Passing an integer to ``bytes`` in Python 2
 | |
| will give you the string representation of the integer: ``bytes(3) == '3'``.
 | |
| But in Python 3, an integer argument to ``bytes`` will give you a bytes object
 | |
| as long as the integer specified, filled with null bytes:
 | |
| ``bytes(3) == b'\x00\x00\x00'``. A similar worry is necessary when passing a
 | |
| bytes object to ``str``. In Python 2 you just get the bytes object back:
 | |
| ``str(b'3') == b'3'``. But in Python 3 you get the string representation of the
 | |
| bytes object: ``str(b'3') == "b'3'"``.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Finally, the indexing of binary data requires careful handling (slicing does
 | |
| **not** require any special handling). In Python 2,
 | |
| ``b'123'[1] == b'2'`` while in Python 3 ``b'123'[1] == 50``. Because binary data
 | |
| is simply a collection of binary numbers, Python 3 returns the integer value for
 | |
| the byte you index on. But in Python 2 because ``bytes == str``, indexing
 | |
| returns a one-item slice of bytes. The six_ project has a function
 | |
| named ``six.indexbytes()`` which will return an integer like in Python 3:
 | |
| ``six.indexbytes(b'123', 1)``.
 | |
| 
 | |
| To summarize:
 | |
| 
 | |
| #. Decide which of your APIs take text and which take binary data
 | |
| #. Make sure that your code that works with text also works with ``unicode`` and
 | |
|    code for binary data works with ``bytes`` in Python 2 (see the table above
 | |
|    for what methods you cannot use for each type)
 | |
| #. Mark all binary literals with a ``b`` prefix, textual literals with a ``u``
 | |
|    prefix
 | |
| #. Decode binary data to text as soon as possible, encode text as binary data as
 | |
|    late as possible
 | |
| #. Open files using :func:`io.open` and make sure to specify the ``b`` mode when
 | |
|    appropriate
 | |
| #. Be careful when indexing into binary data
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Use feature detection instead of version detection
 | |
| ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 | |
| 
 | |
| Inevitably you will have code that has to choose what to do based on what
 | |
| version of Python is running. The best way to do this is with feature detection
 | |
| of whether the version of Python you're running under supports what you need.
 | |
| If for some reason that doesn't work then you should make the version check be
 | |
| against Python 2 and not Python 3. To help explain this, let's look at an
 | |
| example.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Let's pretend that you need access to a feature of :mod:`importlib` that
 | |
| is available in Python's standard library since Python 3.3 and available for
 | |
| Python 2 through importlib2_ on PyPI. You might be tempted to write code to
 | |
| access e.g. the :mod:`importlib.abc` module by doing the following::
 | |
| 
 | |
|   import sys
 | |
| 
 | |
|   if sys.version_info[0] == 3:
 | |
|       from importlib import abc
 | |
|   else:
 | |
|       from importlib2 import abc
 | |
| 
 | |
| The problem with this code is what happens when Python 4 comes out? It would
 | |
| be better to treat Python 2 as the exceptional case instead of Python 3 and
 | |
| assume that future Python versions will be more compatible with Python 3 than
 | |
| Python 2::
 | |
| 
 | |
|   import sys
 | |
| 
 | |
|   if sys.version_info[0] > 2:
 | |
|       from importlib import abc
 | |
|   else:
 | |
|       from importlib2 import abc
 | |
| 
 | |
| The best solution, though, is to do no version detection at all and instead rely
 | |
| on feature detection. That avoids any potential issues of getting the version
 | |
| detection wrong and helps keep you future-compatible::
 | |
| 
 | |
|   try:
 | |
|       from importlib import abc
 | |
|   except ImportError:
 | |
|       from importlib2 import abc
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Prevent compatibility regressions
 | |
| ---------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once you have fully translated your code to be compatible with Python 3, you
 | |
| will want to make sure your code doesn't regress and stop working under
 | |
| Python 3. This is especially true if you have a dependency which is blocking you
 | |
| from actually running under Python 3 at the moment.
 | |
| 
 | |
| To help with staying compatible, any new modules you create should have
 | |
| at least the following block of code at the top of it::
 | |
| 
 | |
|     from __future__ import absolute_import
 | |
|     from __future__ import division
 | |
|     from __future__ import print_function
 | |
| 
 | |
| You can also run Python 2 with the ``-3`` flag to be warned about various
 | |
| compatibility issues your code triggers during execution. If you turn warnings
 | |
| into errors with ``-Werror`` then you can make sure that you don't accidentally
 | |
| miss a warning.
 | |
| 
 | |
| You can also use the Pylint_ project and its ``--py3k`` flag to lint your code
 | |
| to receive warnings when your code begins to deviate from Python 3
 | |
| compatibility. This also prevents you from having to run Modernize_ or Futurize_
 | |
| over your code regularly to catch compatibility regressions. This does require
 | |
| you only support Python 2.7 and Python 3.4 or newer as that is Pylint's
 | |
| minimum Python version support.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Check which dependencies block your transition
 | |
| ----------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| **After** you have made your code compatible with Python 3 you should begin to
 | |
| care about whether your dependencies have also been ported. The caniusepython3_
 | |
| project was created to help you determine which projects
 | |
| -- directly or indirectly -- are blocking you from supporting Python 3. There
 | |
| is both a command-line tool as well as a web interface at
 | |
| https://caniusepython3.com.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The project also provides code which you can integrate into your test suite so
 | |
| that you will have a failing test when you no longer have dependencies blocking
 | |
| you from using Python 3. This allows you to avoid having to manually check your
 | |
| dependencies and to be notified quickly when you can start running on Python 3.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Update your ``setup.py`` file to denote Python 3 compatibility
 | |
| --------------------------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once your code works under Python 3, you should update the classifiers in
 | |
| your ``setup.py`` to contain ``Programming Language :: Python :: 3`` and to not
 | |
| specify sole Python 2 support. This will tell anyone using your code that you
 | |
| support Python 2 **and** 3. Ideally you will also want to add classifiers for
 | |
| each major/minor version of Python you now support.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Use continuous integration to stay compatible
 | |
| ---------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Once you are able to fully run under Python 3 you will want to make sure your
 | |
| code always works under both Python 2 & 3. Probably the best tool for running
 | |
| your tests under multiple Python interpreters is tox_. You can then integrate
 | |
| tox with your continuous integration system so that you never accidentally break
 | |
| Python 2 or 3 support.
 | |
| 
 | |
| You may also want to use the ``-bb`` flag with the Python 3 interpreter to
 | |
| trigger an exception when you are comparing bytes to strings or bytes to an int
 | |
| (the latter is available starting in Python 3.5). By default type-differing
 | |
| comparisons simply return ``False``, but if you made a mistake in your
 | |
| separation of text/binary data handling or indexing on bytes you wouldn't easily
 | |
| find the mistake. This flag will raise an exception when these kinds of
 | |
| comparisons occur, making the mistake much easier to track down.
 | |
| 
 | |
| And that's mostly it! At this point your code base is compatible with both
 | |
| Python 2 and 3 simultaneously. Your testing will also be set up so that you
 | |
| don't accidentally break Python 2 or 3 compatibility regardless of which version
 | |
| you typically run your tests under while developing.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| Consider using optional static type checking
 | |
| --------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| Another way to help port your code is to use a static type checker like
 | |
| mypy_ or pytype_ on your code. These tools can be used to analyze your code as
 | |
| if it's being run under Python 2, then you can run the tool a second time as if
 | |
| your code is running under Python 3. By running a static type checker twice like
 | |
| this you can discover if you're e.g. misusing binary data type in one version
 | |
| of Python compared to another. If you add optional type hints to your code you
 | |
| can also explicitly state whether your APIs use textual or binary data, helping
 | |
| to make sure everything functions as expected in both versions of Python.
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _caniusepython3: https://pypi.org/project/caniusepython3
 | |
| .. _cheat sheet: https://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html
 | |
| .. _coverage.py: https://pypi.org/project/coverage
 | |
| .. _Futurize: https://python-future.org/automatic_conversion.html
 | |
| .. _importlib2: https://pypi.org/project/importlib2
 | |
| .. _Modernize: https://python-modernize.readthedocs.io/
 | |
| .. _mypy: http://mypy-lang.org/
 | |
| .. _Porting to Python 3: http://python3porting.com/
 | |
| .. _Pylint: https://pypi.org/project/pylint
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _Python 3 Q & A: https://ncoghlan-devs-python-notes.readthedocs.io/en/latest/python3/questions_and_answers.html
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _pytype: https://github.com/google/pytype
 | |
| .. _python-future: https://python-future.org/
 | |
| .. _python-porting: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-porting/
 | |
| .. _six: https://pypi.org/project/six
 | |
| .. _tox: https://pypi.org/project/tox
 | |
| .. _trove classifier: https://pypi.org/classifiers
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _Why Python 3 exists: https://snarky.ca/why-python-3-exists
 |