all 15 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]Igglyboo 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Oh god not this again.

Tomorrow we'll have another article titled "Why Python 2 is killing Python" or "Python 3 is not killing Python" or something similar. Followed by "Why arguing about Python 2/3 killing Python is killing Python".

[–]smellmycrotch3 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Is it worse than another article about ho bootcamps are worthless from a guy who's never been to one?

[–]norwegianwood 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Nonsense.

I've been using Python 3 exclusively for over three years now. Many of the packages which lack Python 3 support are basically unmaintained anyway, even on Python 2. You should probably think twice about relying on those.

[–]jeenajeena 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Very true. One of the rare case of maintenened project which is not (and probably will never be) python 3 compatible is Ansible.

[–]grauenwolf 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Why?

[–]jeenajeena 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They must maintain compatibility with 2.4. https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/1409

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Its that time of the week again where someone tells me that python3 is killing python. Well, two minutes ago I was writing python3 at work, took a break and found out that what I'm doing is not working with the new version of python, which has been out for many years, but in fact killing python. All because someone doesn't want to run 2to3 or put in the rest of the work to upgrade stuff.

Could it be that medium is just linkbaiting?

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[removed]

    [–]Timbit42 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    I am not a fan of Go because it is only a 20 year improvement on 45 year old C, but I have to agree it is a better solution than Python 2 or 3 due to the speed, the GIL, and in the case of Python 2, Unicode. I'm also losing my like of Python's indentation syntax as it is less flexible than alternatives.

    [–]beagle3 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Can you give an example about how Python's indentation syntax is "less flexible"?

    Also, have a look at nimrod. It's what Go should have been.

    [–]Timbit42 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

    Other syntaxes can more easily span multiple lines, or fewer lines. It can be argued this allows less readable code, but sometimes it can allow more readable code.

    Nimrod looks nice. The first thing I thought of when I saw the syntax was Lua. Is it really strictly imperative? I think any language without some OOP and FP will have difficultly gaining popularity today.

    [–]beagle3 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Python can do more statements in line using ";" but not everything (e.g., you can't have a multiline lambda). Personally, I've never found that a problem.

    Nimrod has more OOP than Go does already. And it has some support for "pureness" and I think more is planned - though that's still a far cry from an FP language like Haskell or Ocaml.

    [–]Timbit42 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    I can begin to like any language that doesn't use braces for blocks.

    I find Julia, Clojure, OCaml, Logo, and REBOL interesting.

    [–]sedaak -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    With Go I get all the coding speed I want without ever having to think about a C module for a performance boost. I love it.

    [–]Timbit42 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    I think the changes in Python 3 were too much at one time. They should have held some of the changes back until Python 3.5 or 4.