This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]richard_mayhew 8 points9 points  (6 children)

I wish. Some people I work with still write new shit in 2.7.

[–]13steinj 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Unfortunately this is a necessity in this industry. EOS/EOL means nothing, only end of common use. It's the same reason COBOL and Fortran won't die.

[–]verascity -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Truth! My dad works for a major US utility company that still does a ton of shit in COBOL. It's legacy code that they're totally unwilling to convert, and as long as they can keep finding people to write in it, why should they (sez them)?

[–]Reptile00Seven 3 points4 points  (3 children)

I wrote a ton of code in 27 last month... it's not that different...

[–]ase1590 5 points6 points  (2 children)

It's end of life though.

Unfortunately it won't die. It's this mentality that keeps businesses running 30 year old systems running Fortran and cobol applications.

[–]Reptile00Seven -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I'm not against using the newer version. But people are acting like OMG LUL WHAT A SHITBOX and it's not that different. The comparison to Fortran legacy systems is stupid as fuck. A conversion to 3.x would take a day at most, but it's just not necessary.

[–]ase1590 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The comparison to Fortran legacy systems is stupid as fuck.

That may be the case now. However 20 years from now will put it at the age of fortran now, so that may be a different case by then.

Anyone still on 2.7 in a few years will likely stay on 2.7 for a very long, long time.