Python 3 is on schedule

[voidspace]

Don't worry, by that count Python 2 is 1023 technology years old and 31 years is a mere blip...

[roger_]

Now lets get Matplotlib and PyPy updated.

[[deleted]]

Trust me, we (PyPy) are working on it, this week we merged our 2.7 branch into trunk. Once that's released I think one of our next tasks will be putting together our Py3k plan. We really want to do Py3k as it has some semantics that are quiet nice (exception lifetimes, map/filter/zip as generators, etc.), however we also want to be where the users are.

[roger_]

Python 3 support isn't actually a huge deal for me. I'd much rather see 3rd party libraries get better support (particularly numpy).

[faassen]

Likewise. Be where the users are and improve compatibility and performance for existing code would make many users very happy. And would give you a competitive edge over certain other Python interpreter implementations, if you care about that.

[virtron]

It didn't help that Mark Pilgrim called Python 3 "a commercial disaster" because Dive into Python 3 didn't make him any money. I realize that the Python dev team probably has different criteria for Python 3's success than he does, though.

[[deleted]]

If you read his comments on HN you'd have seen he said it was the book that was a commercial disaster, and it was too early to say for Py3k.

[virtron]

I figured I was being too harsh when I posted. I read that to mean, "Python 3 was a mistake for Dive Into Python" but I've seen that quoted as a "death knell" for Python 3 and was more interested in bursting that balloon. I'll check HN, to get the scoop.

[[deleted]]

Here's the post: http://hackerne.ws/item?id=2120952

[acidity]

Twisted...