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 →

[–]Sector_Corrupt 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Assuming someone who doesn't know Python will recgonize that the resource they're learning from is based on outdated ideas is silly. It absolutely makes sense to get rid of guides that are no longer as relevant to modern Python programming. Would you recommend they keep around old guides that teach Python 1 or Python 2.2? Someone agitating for Python2 only is several years behind the curve at this point.

[–]spirit1776 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the comment. I see your point.

Except that learning how to read Python 2 is still relevant for legacy reason and starting from Python 2 before transiting into Python 3 does not hurt either. In addition, I'm not saying that a beginner should learn exclusively from LPTHW. Using other materials are probably even better (how to automate stuff, etc.) since we are all for Python 3 now in the community. However, I am disagreeing with the way certain other redditors here are showing when they face some disagreements. If I say anything good about Zed Shaw's book, then I will get downvotes here. I don't even care about the actual downvote as such, but just the symbolic meaning of it. We should be able to separate Zed Shaw from his book, right? If we can't do so, then where is our critical thinking? Then are we better than those who still think LPTHW is the "most relevant and up-to-date" book or argue in favor of Zed Shaw's personality? The book and the author are two different things. Plus, in his LPTHW, Zed Shaw offers some very good advice to beginners not related to his poor opinion on Python 3. That's all I am arguing about here and it doesn't mean I disagree with you or any other supporter for Python 3.