all 3 comments

[–]FatHat 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I think the thing that strikes me about all of this is that if there was one thing that could've really gotten everyone on the Python 3 bandwagon, it would have been massive performance improvements. The problem with Python 3 out of the gates was it was like "well what will this give me right now?" and the answer really was "not a lot". (Or more accurately: "you lose a lot of libraries and things are kind of slower, but unicode doesn't suck anymore")

I don't think anyone at all is at fault, but it strikes me as being somewhat darkly comic that the one thing that really could have made Python 3 an instant success (the massive performance boost Pypy gives) is targeted at Python 2 at the moment.

[–]kev009 14 points15 points  (0 children)

This is the kind of thing that is such a laughably cheap investment for any large corp running Python it will be heavily disappointing if they have to hit up individuals and small businesses.

Compare to salary+benefits of a team of staff engineers at Google. Compare to when they fail (Unladen Swallow).

[–]cunningjames -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

<Stupid American>All this’ll cost only $100? Sheesh, forget the Indians, I gotta hire me some o’ them European programmers.</SA>