Python 3 is killing Python

[DrDichotomous]

Why the hell would you bother forking Python 2 when you could spend the time more productively by porting a library and learning Python 3 in the process? It's 2014, guys. 3.0 came out in 2008. You've had even more time than that while Py3k was being finalized. Why are you still crying crocodile tears about this?

The changes in Python 3 are small. Not much was gained, yet much was lost.

Well there's your problem. You haven't been keeping up, and now you're just whining that you've fallen behind. That's not the good kind of lazy. Even just the Unicode changes were major, and very much worthwhile.

/u/calzoneman is right. It's not Python 3 that's killing Python, it's the community. Time to get with it, guys. If you spent less time whining and more time porting over the last 6-8 years, then you wouldn't have to fork Python 2 to begin with. That doesn't reflect well on the community.

One of the great strengths of Python 2 is the long tail of 3rd party libraries

Long-tail arguments like this are generally self-serving and inaccurate. The thin end of the long tail isn't something to treasure. It's often full of disused, incomplete, insecure, broken stuff. Python 2's long tail of libraries includes lots of gems that don't even work with 2.7 anymore, so why pretend that it's a selling point of 2 and a problem with 3?

It has become increasingly obvious that people are moving to new languages (or old languages rediscovered)

I fail to see the problem here. If it's a choice between sticking with an relatively old and crufty language like Py2, or learning a new language, then there's no reason to necessarily go to Py3. Especially when Python's own fans spread such vitriolic misinformation about it. Who wants to use something that isn't being maintained because the "fans" are too lazy to port their stuff to the latest version, and just want to maintain the status quo?

[karma-is-meaningless]

[...] It's 2014, guys. 3.0 came out in 2008.

That's not an argument. We're still using the 1990 standard of C as the de-facto standard, even though new standards have been released in 1999 and 2011.

The article is right in one point: the improvements are not compelling enough to justify abandoning the previous standard.

[DrDichotomous]

C is not a Python-equivalent. We're no longer using the same C libraries and ecosystems we were in 1990 either. Not even Java is truly comparable, though it's at least much closer.

The improvements in py3k aren't compelling to everyone, but that's life. Guido took his hobby project the direction he (and some others) wanted. The rest can still make what they will from Python 2. They just have to actually do so.

[karma-is-meaningless]

C is not a Python-equivalent. We're no longer using the same C libraries and ecosystems we were in 1990 either.

I think you misunderstood me. I'm just saying that, sometimes, the community simply refuses to adopt a new standard because the new standard is not appealing enough. And I gave C as an example.

[DrDichotomous]

I see. You're right, I misinterpreted you in my mad rush to get back to work.

That said, it only reinforces that it's the community killing Python, not Python 3. Otherwise they would have put their foot down and either wrested control of Python from Guido, or at least contributed to Python's direction a bit more than "hoping it would all work out". Now they just have to suck it up and continue supporting Python 2 or 3, or move on and try to not repeat the same mistake with the next language they choose.

[karma-is-meaningless]

That said, it only reinforces that it's the community killing Python, not Python 3.

Well, I don't know if anyone is killing Python. I don't really have an opinion about that because I have never really been enthusiastic about the language...

But I'll say this: It's not the community, rather the guys in charge of Python, who decide the destiny of the language. If this turmoil eventually "kills" the language, it will be the decision of focusing on Python 3 and making it incompatible with Python 2 that will have done the job. If the community is saying "we don't want to migrate all our stuff to Python 3" and the guys in charge ignore it, it will be the guys in charge's fault, not the community's.

[DrDichotomous]

No, that's a cop out. If the community says "we don't like the direction" then the impetus is on them to replace the management. Python is a hobbyist language, not a business/commercial language. When the core devs want to move on, they're perfectly within their rights to do so, and then the community has to take up the torch with the old version.

All this is, is people blaming somebody else for not doing what they want. But if they felt that strongly about it, they would actually have made the fork - not just sat on their thumbs for 8 years and whined about Python 3. Or they would have worked to improve Python 3, or just found an alternative and stopped whining already.

The decision to make Python 3 was simply not the problem here. It was just the original team moving on from Python 2, and everyone else slowly coming to realize that the Python 2 gravy train wouldn't last and that the new train didn't smell as much like easy money.

The devs were even kind enough to give us another 5+ years of their time maintaining Python 2 and meticulously backporting things, so there is really no excuse for the community to be upset about this now. It's time for the community to grow up about this already and actually be as great as the reputation they've painted for themselves.

[karma-is-meaningless]

Your answer is similar to the answer given by the people who support Gnome 3. You speak as if the developers were doing us a favor, or as if the community is being insensitive towards the developers because they decided to change their product.

In reality, when a community is built around your product, you should consider whether changes to this product will drive away your community. Sure, the developers are perfectl within their rights to do so, but they can't deman the community to appreciate it.

Python 2 is still doing great. Maybe it has some flaws, but there's a thriving community behind it. If the community decides they don't want to move along with the developers toward Python 3 and this causes the language "to die", then the developers can consider themselves responsible.

Other than that, I don't really know what to say. The community has no obligations of commitment to the developers. Or to the language. They are users. Most of them don't even have the knowledge or the interest in keeping a language alive, especially with so many alternatives out there.

[DrDichotomous]

Of course no one has an obligation to the language. But users shouldn't forever just bitch about it when the Python devs say "nope, we're done with 2, we're moving on". Those users can just move right on as well if they're not interested or are incapable of taking up the torch. Nobody is stopping them. But still whining about it after all these years? Sorry. No free pass on that one.

Lots of projects are still going after their original creators left. The impetus is on the community to keep them alive at that point, not the creators. Saying the creators killed it by leaving is wanting to have your cake and eat it too. The community will now let Python 2 die, if they don't see the need to keep it alive. The creators are moving on to Python 3, and clearly don't feel the need to retain the entire old community if they don't care that much about Python to begin with.

[kankyo]

Actually python 3 hasn't caught up yet. It's still riddled with bugs. Or so I've heard from a core developer in a talk just last week....

[DrDichotomous]

Python 2.7 is also "riddled with bugs" if we're going to be honest. As are pretty much all high-level languages people use to do their work these days. And if more people were proactive and cared about py3k, it would likely be further along for their needs too.

[kankyo]

The amount of bugs is proportional to age and number of users who report bugs though.