backward compatibility?

[Peter Kleiweg]

So how serious are plans to remove things from Python, like
lambda and map and reduce? I am just starting out with Python
and if there is a danger that the programs I write today won't
work next year, I rather invest my time in another language. I
might try Ruby, or stick with Perl.

 

[Ville Vainio]

Peter> So how serious are plans to remove things from Python, like
Peter> lambda and map and reduce? I am just starting out with Python

Not very. Talking about it is mostly a way to steer newbies away from
them towards superior approaches (list comprehensions and generator
expressions). Even if the features were removed, they could be
trivially implemented by yourself in python so none of your code would
break. Well, noe lambda but I don't believe it will be removed - too
much code depends on it.

Peter> and if there is a danger that the programs I write today
Peter> won't work next year, I rather invest my time in another
Peter> language. I might try Ruby, or stick with Perl.

Well, if you care about running your code on the new interpreters few
years from now (nobody is going to force you to upgrade - some poor
tossers still use python 1.5.2), Python is the best bet from the
languages you mention. Ruby is going to break compatibility big time
soon (or so I've heard - big rewrite or sth), and perl is going
through the perl6 pains. Python is extremely cautious about breaking
backwards compatibility, sometimes even too cautious for my taste...

 

[Aahz]

So how serious are plans to remove things from Python, like lambda and
map and reduce? I am just starting out with Python and if there is a
danger that the programs I write today won't work next year, I rather
invest my time in another language. I might try Ruby, or stick with
Perl.

It's serious. OTOH, they'll stay in the language until Python 3.0 comes
out, and there's nobody forcing you to upgrade. The useful lifespan of
a Python version seems to be about three or four years (my company just
switched from Python 1.5.2 to Python 2.2, so we'll be two full versions
out of date by the end of the year).
--
Aahz ([email protected]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a
koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You
discover truth everytime you use it." (e-mail address removed)

 

[Anthony Baxter]

It's serious. OTOH, they'll stay in the language until Python 3.0 comes
out, and there's nobody forcing you to upgrade. The useful lifespan of
a Python version seems to be about three or four years (my company just
switched from Python 1.5.2 to Python 2.2, so we'll be two full versions
out of date by the end of the year).

Note also that Python 3.0 (aka Python 3000) isn't even close to being
started - I suspect we're at least 4 or 5 years from it happening. And
there's still going to be at least a couple more major releases in the 2.x
cycle before then.

See PEP 3000 for the current collection of ideas for Python 3.0.

Anthony

 

[John J. Lee]

So how serious are plans to remove things from Python, like
lambda and map and reduce? I am just starting out with Python
and if there is a danger that the programs I write today won't
work next year, I rather invest my time in another language. I
might try Ruby, or stick with Perl.

Won't happen until Python 3.0. When / if 3.0 comes out (more than
five years away), I'm sure people will continue to maintain 2.x for a
long time after that.


John