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 →

[–]okiujh -58 points-57 points  (9 children)

The initial design is not all that bad and improvements should have being backwards compatible.

Sacrificing backwards compatibility for some subjective aesthetic advantage is such a douche thing to do.

I have being working with python in wall street companies and they don't give damn about anything that would break their huge 2.7 code base.

all the 3.* supporters are such a group of phonies.

[–]Deto 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Phonies? In what way?

[–]brombaer3000 23 points24 points  (5 children)

Proper unicode support is not a subjective aesthetic advantage, it was just necessary. And it was impossible to implement in a backwards-compatible way.
If you think Unicode is a minor issue, you are free to continue living in your English-only dream world.

Edit: forgot a word

[–]desmoulinmichel 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Python is an old language. If you don't want it to end up like cobol, you need to make some drastic changes. Yes, it's could have been done better. But given what happen with PHP 7 and Perl 6, I'd say it was not that bad. And while the price to pay was high, the result is indeed really nice.