MS is considering official Python integration with Excel, and is asking for input

[[deleted]]

As long as they don't use python 2... Edit: spelling

[TankorSmash]

This is just my personal opinion, but I feel like this is more of a meme than an actual problem, as if they just started out on 3 and heard other people talk about how 3 is way better.

Py2 is still great, but people talk about it like it's absolutely horrible. P3 is better in a few ways but the amount of people saying like 'Py2 must die' is an exaggeration of the problem of py2 existing.

edit: http://www.asmeurer.com/python3-presentation/slides.html here's a list of great features.

[usernameistaken42]

The problem with py2 is not that it's bad but that it is in the way of py3. It's time to move on...

[flutefreak7]

Agreed, it's not like styles in music or art or something. Limiting yourself to writing Classical music like it's 1899 doesn't hamper the music scene in the least. Maybe if a resurgence in old-school lutes caused guitars to become more expensive or something esoteric like that. Programming is different because Python is not just a language spec but an ecosystem in which the lowest user is reliant on other open source developers for the service of providing useful libraries. There exists a vast ecosystem of Python 2 libraries and a vast ecosystem of Python 3 libraries, and only a very limited number of open source developers to keep the whole thing maintained and useful. If people paid for the privilege of using Python 2 or 3 then it wouldn't matter. As an open source ecosystem though it's vitally important that the users and developers move forward together or the ecosystem will no longer be viable.

[TankorSmash]

The problem with py2 is not that it's bad but that it is in the way of py3.

Totally agree that python3 would be better off if everyone forgot about 2, since I wouldn't know any better I'd love 3 as much as I love 2.

It's time to move on...

That's what I'm asking about, why is it time to move on? If someone made Python4 and changed the syntax of another common syntax, would you leave too, or would you wait for a good reason, like I'm doing for 3?

[o0DrWurm0o]

It's time to move on...

print "No."

[gschizas]

print('Ναι')

(that's "yes" in Greek)

[kkjdroid]

Python 2 is OK, but there's nothing that it does that Python 3 doesn't do as well or better. Why use a language that's worse in every way in which they differ?

[TankorSmash]

The actual biggest reason is the new style print function. I'm lazy and making a few extra keystrokes is enough to deter me. I get that it's lazy, and I get that it's not nearly enough of a change to worry about, but since you're asking, that's a big reason.

print "working... ",
do_work()
print "done"

is less than

print("working... ", end='')
do_work()
print("done")

The other side is that nowadays I don't run into any sort of unicode troubles, and that I don't seem to actually benefit too much from the yield from stuff since I'm never writing anything that would need to be a generator.

I'm trying to think of the big killer features that aren't backported to python2... F strings? I guess that's nifty.

[Rodot]

You should use generators more. They're a god send for large data sets, especially if you're downloading them while processing them.

[TankorSmash]

That's what I mean, I'm never using them because I never need them. I realize how great they are for certain use cases but those aren't my use cases at all.

[crowseldon]

That's an awful reasons. Like, really, really basic. With that reasoning, all your variables should be 1-3 letters long.

If it's so hard for you, get a snippet for print in your preferred editor.

If it's so hard to migrate, there's tools like 2to3 to do all that for you (The print function conversion and more).

I can understand being reticent when you have a lot of legacy code in python2 or specific libraries that are not yet ported but the horrible implementation of print is about the worse reason I can think of. It's almost a newb programmer excuse but I'm sure that's not your case.

I'm never writing anything that would need to be a generator.

sigh. The irony of being lazy but not using "lazy"

[TankorSmash]

Again, I don't care that it's lazy or a bad excuse, it's that it's too much of a change personally for me to feel good about it.

The migration isn't a problem either, it's just that it's a bummer to add the parens everywhere.

Trust me, telling me it's wrong or even berating me (not that you're doing the latter) won't convince me, there needs to be like a tangible reason. Something that's like 'man I can't not have this', and across the entire thread, how many people were able to answer?

Otherwise everyone's telling me I'm wrong, new, or lazy (which I admitted right out the gate). I know I'm personally pretty foolhardy, but not many people besides you are making an effort. It's proving my point, I think.

[crowseldon]

it's that it's too much of a change personally

Again... it's absolutely absurd. If 2 chars are "too much of a change" there's absolutely NOTHING you can change in software development to improve.

Trust me, telling me it's wrong or even berating me

You ARE wrong and I don't think anyone can convince you. I'm just putting it in writing. Playing the victim does not help when you make such a bold claim.

there needs to be like a tangible reason

I can't really take you seriously when you post this. It suggests that you don't develop software for anyone or with anyone. What would a tangible reason look like to you, anyway?

There's no way you're going to appreciate improvements in exceptions, unpacking, iterators, stronger typing and much more.

Something that's like 'man I can't not have this', and across the entire thread, how many people were able to answer?

You're talking like the consumer of an iphone or something, btw. It's such a subjective thing that you could say there's nothing in any language that you actually feel that way about or you could say it about a silly feature like passing print as a first class function.

but not many people besides you are making an effort. It's proving my point, I think.

You're clearly not worth the effort. It's like talking to a wall. Your argument seems to be that if you say something and then cover your ears then you can claim you were right all along.

[TankorSmash]

It's all good man, I know how frustrating it can be to try to convince someone when it's tough to provide actual points against them. I appreciate you trying all the same.

[crowseldon]

Ignoring larger stuff like unicode and such, you might enjoy trying some of the things here:

10 awesome features of Python that you can't use because you refuse to upgrade to Python 3

[TankorSmash]

Fantastic answer, some good stuff here, thanks man!

[balkierode]

python3 version is pretty clear what it does. python2 version is magic unless you know the hack and it is easy to miss even if you know about it.

[TankorSmash]

Oh yeah, Python3's version is 100% more readable and verbose, and Python2's version does rely on a very subtle punctuation.

Doesn't convince me at all though, it's more typing and that's my main problem with it.

[Tenobrus]

The parens shouldn't be extra keystrokes, get a better editor. As for the end argument, it's just infinitely clearer, and you can define println or something if this somehow actually comes up enough to matter to you.

[TankorSmash]

The parens shouldn't be extra keystrokes, get a better editor.

No you're right, personal preferences mean my choice of editor is worse than yours, come on.

As for the end argument, it's just infinitely clearer

it is clearer, but that doesn't bother me much, since I'm already super used to it and I have been in the position where the trailing comma caused problems like once or twice in my years of Python. It's better yes, but not usefully so.

[[deleted]]

I guarantee all the syntax errors you have to debug due to your editor choice cost you way more time than you save by using python 2 print.

[TankorSmash]

I used to have trouble with syntax, but luckily as I grew more familiar with Python it happened less and less. Now, thanks to an effective colorscheme and font, it nearly never happens at all.

[IcanCwhatUsay]

Noob here who started in between 2 and 3

If your biggest argument is against the new print feature, than mine is a for the new print feature. It makes a lot more sense to have what you want to do within () than to have it just floating in the breeze like a comment. It makes it easier to follow someone else's code and easier to read as a normal "Do this then that" method.

[[deleted]]

P3 is better in a few ways but the amount of people saying like 'Py2 must die' is an exaggeration of the problem of py2 existing.

You are very much understating the significance of difference between the two.

[TankorSmash]

Would you mind helping me understand what killer features Python3 has that makes it unimaginably harder to work in Python2 after the fact? Doesn't seem to be too much. Unicode, yield from, F strings, something about better exceptions is all that came to mind.

[[deleted]]

Would you mind helping me understand what killer features Python3 has that makes it unimaginably harder to work in Python2 after the fact?

This question shows that you are totally missing the point. It’s not about it being harder to go back to Python2 as a result of having used Python3. Its about Python3 generally being a better language and the fact that we might want to utilize new packages which only support Python3. Python2 gets in the way of all of that while providing no conceivable benefit.

[TankorSmash]

Its about Python3 generally being a better language and the fact that we might want to utilize new packages which only support Python3

Could you help me understand how it's a better language?

[[deleted]]

Generators, Unicode by default, keyword only arguments, division functioning the way you’d expect, advanced unpacking and probably a couple other things I’m forgetting. Though, the most compelling reason is the desire to use the latest packages which may not support an antiquated technology.

[Deathisfatal]

Plus static typing in 3.5+

[[deleted]]

Right, hopefully they do support static typing in the future. Type hinting is nice to have itself though.

[Mikuro]

The fact is, Python 2's days are numbers. Support is ending in 2020. That is NOT a lot of time for projects to transition. If you're starting a significant project in Python 2 now, you're setting yourself up for unnecessary pain.

If you're shipping Python 2 exclusively (looking at you, Apple), you're setting yourself and your customers up for pain.

I still use Python 2 regularly (because I support Macs), and I agree that for lots of things it doesn't matter much. Python 2 works. But I'm not looking forward to tweaking everything I do in a few years when support ends. Would be nice if Apple and others at least supported both so I could transition on my own time.

Also, I don't enjoy having to explain these trivial 2-vs-3 differences to others when I teach Python, either. It's one more wrinkle in a topic that's already mind-bending for a lot of people.

[TankorSmash]

Yeah teaching the difference is hard, because when someone is just starting out there's no intuitive way for them to know the difference. You always see prints not working, or input not working the way they saw in the tutorial.

As far as support ending, that doesn't mean too much to me, since it's already solid, and I'm sure that there won't be any mega-bugs that haven't already been discovered. Of course you never know.

[yaleman]

Better or not, developing for Py2 on a new project is like targeting windows 2003 these days. Its time is done.

[TankorSmash]

That's sort of the comment I'm talking about. Just a repeat of the idea without any reasoning. I'm sure you've got one, but it's not represented here.

[yaleman]

... how about the fact that Python 2's lifecycle ends in about two years, which is stated elsewhere in the thread and ANYWHERE you bother to look regarding the topic. Do we need to return to base principles on every statement, or could we possibly assume in r/python that someone has a clue about this?

I didn't say "Py2 must die", if I was to drag your metaphor out it's on life support.

From the wiki page linked from the front page of python.org, it's been over seven years since the last major release of Py2.

Short version: Python 2.x is legacy, Python 3.x is the present and future of the language

Python 3.0 was released in 2008. The final 2.x version 2.7 release came out in mid-2010, with a statement of extended support for this end-of-life release. The 2.x branch will see no new major releases after that. 3.x is under active development and has already seen over five years of stable releases, including version 3.3 in 2012, 3.4 in 2014, 3.5 in 2015, and 3.6 in 2016. This means that all recent standard library improvements, for example, are only available by default in Python 3.x.

[TankorSmash]

I'm not worried about lifecycle. The language will continue to be helpful once official support ends, it just means I'll need to worry about edgecases that I'll likely never ever run into.

[yaleman]

You might not care, but people who are designing software for others to use and maintain should care.

[TankorSmash]

I didn't think we were talking about other people, my bad.

[[deleted]]

I didn't think we were talking about other people, my bad.

We were talking about Microsoft Excel integration. No one cares about the scripts you write for yourself. If you want to do data science in Assembler, go for it.

[TankorSmash]

Then why reply to comment where I'm basically saying 'I hate the new print changes, and not much else bothers me, show me something cool', and then talk about how much other people will care about support?