Paulo Silva wrote:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/01/1624247
well, this sounds to me as a huge headache... but i'd like to know
oppinions about (what will be improved, what will be changed),
specially all Pygame coders, and how far it may affect Pygame games
supposed to be 'considered' done...
Pygame has been built for Python 2.6 on Windows as a first step in
the
migration to Python 3.0. Getting SDL to link against the Visual
Studio 2008
C runtime was a headache, but it is done. Also all the unit tests
being
added will help in the migration to 3.0. They exercise the various
execution
paths with Pygame for Python 2.6's compatibility warnings. My
concern is the
C api. I assume it has settled down for Python 3.0 and will not
differ much
from 2.x. But there will likely be enough subtle differences to
create
confusion.
One thing a Pygame for 3.0 can use is the new buffer protocol. The
new
protocol explicitly signals the release of shared memory.
Traditionally only
the reference to the owning object is decremented. This makes surface
locking problematic. A surface is locked when its buffer is accessed.
Currently an intermediary buffer object unlocks the surface when it
is
garbage collected. With 3.0 the unlocking can be direct. Though the
new
protocol is present in 2.6, the 2.x version of Pygame needs to remain
backwards compatible.
--
Lenard Lindstrom
<len-l@xxxxxxxxx>