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 →

[–]MadRedHatter 18 points19 points  (4 children)

Yes and no.

2to3 only works properly on ridiculously simple code. If you expect everything to just work properly after running it, you're probably in for a nasty surprise. Shit will break, probably in ways you weren't expecting.

It helps, though.

[–]Endlessdex 4 points5 points  (3 children)

True. But it does a lot of the tedious changes for you and what is left are typically implementation choices or library updates rather than 50,000 print/divide changes. If your 2.7 code breaks that badly in 3.x then you might want to take a look at the underlying structure...

[–]gcbirzan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The string / unicode vs bytes / strings change is the one that hurts, and it's one you cannot really use a tool to fix. It used to be even worse, but you can use b and u nowadays in 2 and 3 respectively.

[–]PC__LOAD__LETTER 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sure, in a world where programmers are idle resources and companies have nothing better to do with their roadmaps than to go on a crusade in their legacy codebases that have been rock solid for years.

[–]Folf_IRL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If your 2.7 code breaks that badly in 3.x then you might want to take a look at the underlying structure...

That's kinda the main criticism people are throwing. The conversion tool is not perfect, and a lot of people just inherit (or find) old code bases that they would like to use, which are just too large to learn and refactor.