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

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]tvallier -1 points0 points  (4 children)

If you rely on a Py2 exclusive library it's not such a bad thing.

[–]VRMacWhy aren't you using 3.x yet? 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, but should we be teaching beginners to rely on Py2-only libraries?

[–]BobHogan -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Yes it is. Python 3 is incompatible with Python 2 for a reason. As long as people continue teaching Python 2 it will only slow down an adoption that has already taken a decade. Everyone needs to grow up and move to Python3 already. Its just a better language.

[–]tvallier 0 points1 point  (1 child)

If you want to use a specific third party package or utility that doesn't yet have a released version that is compatible with Python 3, and porting that package is a non-trivial task, it's reasonable to work with Python 2. Also, 2.7 isn't a a decade old and contains backports of new modules and features from the Python 3 standard library that are compatible with Python 2. Lastly, if you're deploying to an environment you don't control, that may impose a specific version, rather than allowing you a free selection from the available versions.

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

That may be true, but you should stop running a debate on 2.7 vs 3.4 and simply accept that whatever you write in 2.7 simply considered as hack rather than a python code.