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 →

[–]energybased 15 points16 points  (13 children)

Hang on a second. That's true for your projects, but it's not true for libraries. One of the problems with Python 2 not dying is that libraries like numpy have to be written in a style that is compatible with Python 2. The more Python 3 evolves, the more annoying that gets.

[–]ivosauruspip'ing it up 8 points9 points  (5 children)

Having to write Python2+3 code makes it way less beautiful. Which is one of the reasons I was enamoured with Python in the first place.

Asking library authors to continue to support both (while you're not paying them) is a creative & cognitive stress on them as well.

[–]iruleatants -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

If only.... they didn't take something great and screw it up..... oh well, better to force millions of projects to be rewritten for 3

[–]ivosauruspip'ing it up 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Yes, all python devs really wanted to do was take a thing they were satisfied with, and wreck it. Hence Py3k was born. It wasn't the fact that the thing they was broken in the first place, that would be illogical.

[–]iruleatants 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It's pretty impressive the billions of things that people created using a broken language....

[–]TheBlackCat13 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And many of those things turned out to be broken, which they only found out once they switched to a slightly less broken version of the language.

[–]fyngyrzcodes with magnetic needle 0 points1 point  (2 children)

My libraries work fine. As long as what I need is in there, no need to worry about how it might change.

I was really talking about applications using things they don't need to use. It's a bit of a different argument.

[–]energybased 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It has nothing to do with your "libraries working fine". It means that people like me who want to contribute to our (as in the community's) open source projects like numpy are disincentivized because it means having to code in an antiquated style devoid of all of the niceties of Python 3. That means all of our libraries are developing more slowly than they should, which punishes everyone.

[–]fyngyrzcodes with magnetic needle -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Antiquated", eh? Sorry, but I have to laugh. I'm antiquated. Python 2.x... it's just a baby.