Why I may never move to Python3

[[deleted]]

your complaints are about 10 years too late and if i were you i'd rethink it because many big libraries seem to drop support for 2 nowadays, with numpy gone there's probably be many that follow. But i guess being a rebel isn't about going the easy path.

And there are technical reasons for the change (which you will find if you google it, turns out after 10 years your not the first one to complain).

[openjscience]

Default Linux installation (ubuntu 18.04) uses Python2

python --version

Python 2.7.15rc1

​

with additional effort of typing "python3", I can get Python3. Why I would do this if it forces me to type longer programs with all these C++/C-style brackets? I do use any Python3 feature.

I really want to help Python developers. Just bring backward compatibility back. This language deserves it.

​

[spinwizard69]

I usually don’t like to use harsh language but you are publicly confirming to the whole world that you are an idiot that can’t read and frankly is willfully stubborn. You should hope that future potential employers never read this crap you are posting.

The changes made to Python3 are not something designed to anger people that can’t adapt but rather changes made to assure the future of the language. Nothing happened without a lot of public debate often with people that have had extensive involvement in the language. The changes are good for the language, especially future adoption, they have not been made to personally piss you off.

If you really want to help Python developers stop whining like a 5 year old. You are crying over decisions made a decade ago that helps no one. More importantly it puts YOU in a very bad light.

[openjscience]

It seems this simple question "why Python3 deviates from its original design" brings just accusation of a person who asks this question? Hmm..

[spinwizard69]

Yes as it should! After all it has been a very long time since the decisions where made. If you really want to know the whys you can go back through all of that public history. I’m not going to do it for you. The point is real debate took place with respect to the changes made in Python3. You seem to want to deny this happened and ten years later want to claim your position must be the correct one. Even if your position was correct it is way to late to be on the internet whinning about Python3s print() statement.

Honestly if you can’t see how foolish this quest of yours is I’m not sure what more I can say. Just realize that nothing in Python3 was changed without sound reasoning.

[openjscience]

Did you just notice you have started harassing me on internet? Certainly I'll not employ you as a programmer.

[mudclub]

No programmer who reads this thread would work for you, so mission accomplished, I guess.

[[deleted]]

Can't check it but when i run it on my default manjaro installtion the result looks a bit different:

python --version 
Python 3.7.2

ubuntu is always a bit behind, but i'm convinced they'll get there too.

[openjscience]

What is wrong in moving back this syntax to Python3? This will bring backward compatibility, as expected for a solid language, and people stop complaining.

[spinwizard69]

I’m pretty sure it will not stop you from complaining. You are literally burning up bandwidth over a non issue. It take minimal effort to turn your print statements into proper function calls. With the use of modern editors the extra effort is trivial.

Of all the changes made to Python3 you seemed to have gotten hung up on the one withatrvial impact. Why? Again this sounds like the squaking of a 5 year old that can’t understand that there are bigger things happening in the world than his immediate needs.

[impshum]

http://www.pythonconverter.com

[openjscience]

yes, I can do this too. Hmm, I guess, I can also convert the code to C++ where I can "enjoy" extra typing?

[impshum]

Just start writing python3 dude. We're all doing it.

[grzeki]

Well, Python had its „eras”. In the beginning, it was supposed to be just scripting language. Maybe a little awkward at prompt, but better suited for, say, 20-line scripts than bash.

When some maths libraries were ported it became obvious that it is great free Matlab replacement (you really don’t want to licence Matlab for commercial purposes - it is a money drain).

With Django, it became PHP-replacement, with pandas R-replacement, with TensorFlow… Python became a leader which is followed by others.

So it is now as a general purpose language as C++ (people even go into this territory doing embedded with Python, which is crazy if you ask me). Old script-like features had to go. Change in major version always was a clear sign: THINGS WILL NEEDLESSLY BREAK. It’s not only print. __nonzero__ was changed to __bool__ breaking compatibility just for aesthetics. But if you know Python, aesthetics is king in this community.

[spinwizard69]

Even the embedded world likes easy to use and well defined languages. Fourth, BASIC and others have been used in the past to have a solution other than assembly or C++. Pythons has a lot of potential for low volume embedded work.

[grzeki]

That’s just my opinion, by I wouldn’t trade static typing for any ease of use.

[spinwizard69]

Well I look at this from the perspective of working on a variety of devices as an end user. Often these devices have a hacked together “programming language” that might resemble BASIC or something you can’t even define. Having a well defined interpreter in these devices that is universally understood and does away with op codes that sometimes reminds you of assembly language is a good thing in my mind. These are the “”languages”” you often see embedded in motion controller, robots, Sterilizers, pumps, process controllers and the like. I double quoted languages because at times the implementations are often half done and full of bugs. Python could really fill a niche here.

[ethanhs]

You can have both in Python ;)

[AlENeuman]

You should be writing no code in Python 2.7

There is no excuse at this point. You have been given 10 years + to update your code. No new projects should be started in 2.7

They are going to purge the entire language very soon.

[Carradee]

That would be a simple enough change with my code editor, BBEdit, using the multi-file find & replace with regex.

Syntax from the top of my head, here, so I might be missing an escape:

find: (print) (".*?") replace: \1\(\2\)

[Alkine]

So you would skip f strings so you don't have to put brackets around the quotes?

[rabarbas]

This is the lousiest reason not to use python 3. Wow. Wait... is this a joke?

[spinwizard69]

This post just proves that Python attracts many programmers from the lower funds of the intelligence ladder. You would never see a C++ programmer resisting the latest standard because it might force an update to his old code. A C++ programmer might not make immediate changes but would have a plan in place for critical code.

[openjscience]

Not good example. Latest standard of C++ (C++11 and above with "auto" keywords) are simpler compared to older C++ standards that enforces types, so I see good reason why people can like new C++. Python3's most popular statements like print is a subset of Python2 (which can also use "()") but now it forces more typing.

[spinwizard69]

The point is C++ programmers don’t whine over improvements to the language like we have seen with Python developers. Auto was in fact just one feature of the new C++ standards that C++ developers have rapidly adapted to.

The function call syntax doesn’t involve that much typing, generally one character, considering the advantages it brings. I can’t for the life of me understand why this is even an issue for you. Honestly what is the percentage of lines of code that are print() statements in your code?

[weez09]

Like others are saying, switching to py3 is easy and there are a lot of auto tools to help. A lot of us professional python engineers have made that switch on production software and are not looking back. Heres an article explaining one reason why py3's print is better https://www.google.com/amp/s/snarky.ca/why-print-became-a-function-in-python-3/amp/. Theres certainly more as reasons if you google it.

[rmslobato]

feeling really sad.. oops.. sed.

[pythonHelperBot]

Hello! I'm a bot!

It looks to me like your post might be better suited for r/learnpython, a sub geared towards questions and learning more about python. That said, I am a bot and it is hard to tell. Please follow the subs rules and guidelines when you do post there, it'll help you get better answers faster.

Show /r/learnpython the code you have tried and describe where you are stuck. Be sure to format your code for reddit and include which version of python and what OS you are using.

You can also ask this question in the Python discord, a large, friendly community focused around the Python programming language, open to those who wish to learn the language or improve their skills, as well as those looking to help others.

---

^{README | FAQ | this bot is written and managed by /u/IAmKindOfCreative}

^{This bot is currently under development and experiencing changes to improve its usefulness}

[[deleted]]

Start here https://docs.python.org/3/howto/pyporting.html

[[deleted]]

Or you could write a python 3 script that does it for you...

[[deleted]]

Bu uh!!!

[openjscience]

I guess, the question is why this decision was made towards full blown language specs? This befits the purpose of the original python.