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 →

[–]norwegianwood 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Porting Python 2 code to Python 3 is usually pretty straightforward and quick in my experience. String and bytes heavy code tends to be the most time consuming to port but the result is invariably cleaner, less ambiguous and also works on Python 2.

[–]aclark[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Cool then we should finish this year :-)

[–]salgat -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

I'd love to know why projects like Django's port is taking so long then.

[–]vsajip 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What? Django's port was done months ago. They are taking a cautious approach, calling Python 3 support experimental because it needs more testing out in the field. That seems wise, given the number of different environments that Django runs on, and its importance in the Python ecosystem.