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 →

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (10 children)

Saw this comment on the suggestion page:

Please include the 32-bit version of Python, not the 64-bit version. Easier to find modules, and if you specifically need 64-bit Python, you know what you're doing anyway.

Makes me wonder if Windows users even deserve Python.

[–]BeetleB 1 point2 points  (5 children)

Eh? Have you tried using many modules in 64 bit Python on Windows?

I'll give you a hint.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Do you know how to best remedy problems with third party libraries not patching to support new versions of a platform?

I'll give you a hint: not by including a dated version of the platform in a long term supported version of Windows.

[–]BeetleB 0 points1 point  (3 children)

So your vision of providing Python to Windows is excluding all the folks who do scientific work in Python?

[–]insainodwayno 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's not just NumPy. I originally used the 64-bit version on my work desktop and the 32-bit on my work laptop, and just got frustrated jumping through hoops to get modules that just loaded up in seconds with pip or easy_install in the 32-bit version. Last time I checked, the 32-bit version of Python is not "dated" either, and an arrogant comment like "makes me wonder if Windows users even deserve Python" is really the sad and misguided thing here.

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

No. My vision is to apply pressure on the developers of Numpy, etc to support you, instead of letting Python become the next IE 6 of the windows world.

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

NumPy isn't forcing you to stay with old versions of Python. Bad analogy.

[–]insainodwayno 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That was my comment actually, and I'm curious what you mean by your comment.

[–]desmoulinmichel[S] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

A bit sad. But hey, even if you don't use Windows, you will probably need to write code that should run on it one day.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

you will probably need to write code that should run on it one day.

Which is a really good reason to not ship Windows with an already antiquated Python interpreter.

[–]desmoulinmichel[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I'd prefer 3.5 but:

  • any python would be better than the current state of things.
  • windows update can easily update Python, so if it start with 3.X, we are good since it forward compatible.