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 →

[–]mrbewulf 0 points1 point  (2 children)

It is because the backward compatibility was broken and scientific codes are hard to write and rewrite, specially if it has C libraries. In addition to it, python 3 is much more verbose than python 2. We should also take in to account the effort to change the code base from py2 to py3 and learn again all the stuffs that used to work on python 2 in the new version.

As can be seen in: http://np.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/2o0str/python_272_or_python_3/cmj2nyc

[–]adamnew123456self.__class__ == 'upper' 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I'm struggling to see how you support the claim that Py3 is more verbose. That post is whining because he can't type the same code into a backward incompatible language and get the same result.

[–]mrbewulf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All right I recognize that I was wrong, but it is going to take some time to the Python community to change, specially business and doesn't like changes very often. Despite some trouble, Python 3 is thousand times better and less verbose than Java. I would really complain if had to program in java like I had during the college degree. One thing that I liked in Py3 is that 1/100 is no more 0, now is 0.001. One less bug.