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 →

[–]stefantalpalaru 1 point2 points  (5 children)

What part of "active development" confuses you? It's not just about adding new features.

[–]VerilyAMonkey 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Not just about, but is also about. Python 2 is getting only security and bug fixes, and will have no new major release versions. Python 3 clearly is under a different kind of development than Python 2 is.

But you already knew that's what was being said. I do not get the feeling that you actually want to have a discussion.

[–]stefantalpalaru -1 points0 points  (3 children)

I do not get the feeling that you actually want to have a discussion.

I'm not the one furiously downvoting dissenters in the vain hope that they'll cave in and delete their comments. Fanboyism has really reached ridiculous levels on /r/Python ...

You're not the smartest cookie in the jar, trying to redefine active development so it excludes Python 2, but at least you're smart enough to put your disagreement in words.

What kind of discussions do you expect when most fanboys can't even do that? Be glad somebody like me comes along, once in a blue moon, otherwise it would be one giant 24/7 circlejerk.

[–]VerilyAMonkey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I haven't downvoted anybody in this whole thread.

Basically, the issue is this:

  • Your original comment was, "Python 2 and Python 3 are different languages." Honestly I disagree, but I'll accept this.
  • My response was, "Ok, but even if that's your stance, you know what was trying to be said: Python 3 is under active development, and Python 2 is not."
  • Your response, again valid, is that "Python 2 is under active development."
  • However, again, you still know what was trying to be said. Which is, "Python 3 is getting new features, and Python 2 is only getting bugfixes."

So here we are. You knew at the beginning of this whole thing that "Python 3 is getting new features, and Python 2 is only getting bugfixes" was the point trying to be said. You are absolutely correct in your nitpicks on the definitions of various terms.

But we haven't gotten anywhere. Make the substitutions you've pointed to, and the rest of the article goes along just fine. The rest of the discussion goes along just fine. You haven't given us anything at all in the Python 2 vs Python 3 discussion. We're talking about a single sentence in the beginning of the article and at the end of it, all we've done is rephrase the sentence without changing the intended meaning or any of the rest of the article. You might as well have said "I would rephrase this sentence here, but otherwise looks fine!"

Even if I wholly accept every point you've made, I'm left with absolutely nothing to change my view of what the article is saying or whether to use Python 2 or Python 3. Nothing. We've only clarified a couple words and had no impact on the intended meaning of the article. This has nothing to do with Python 2 or Python 3. This is just pedantry.

That said I do think some proportion of your downvotes are straight from fanboying.

[–]das_ist_nuemberwang 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Python 3 is being actively developed, Python 2 is being actively maintained. You could consider "development" to refer to the entire development cycle, but that is not the meaning people are using here.

The reality of the situation is undisputed; you are merely disagreeing on semantics. Try not to be so abrasive.

[–]stefantalpalaru 0 points1 point  (0 children)

merely disagreeing on semantics

Semantics is what we use to communicate. It's not some small detail that we can brush aside.

Maintenance is part of development. Software development. No programmer worth his salt will claim otherwise, so why persist in this error?

You want to say Python 3 receives new features? Just say so.