Python 3 is killing Python

[Larry Martell]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:

https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

 

[Johannes Bauer]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:

https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

Sub-headline "The Python community should fork Python 2". Which could
also read "Someone else should REALLY fork Py2 because I'm mad about Py3
yet too lazy to fork Py2 myself".

I wish all these ridiculous dumb whiners would finally shut up and fork
Python away. That would be win-win: They could use their fork of 2.4
forever and ever, maybe fork 1.4 too while they're at it. Then maintain
it. Above all: They would complain to each other and stay away from the
mailing lists of people who actually *embrace* progress and who
appreciate the wonderful features Py3 has given us.

What a wonderful world it would be. So, I agree with the above blogpost.
Some lazy blogwriting bum should fork Py2!

Cheers,
Johannes

--

Zumindest nicht öffentlich!

Ah, der neueste und bis heute genialste Streich unsere großen
Kosmologen: Die Geheim-Vorhersage.
- Karl Kaos über Rüdiger Thomas in dsa <[email protected]>

 

[Paul Rubin]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10
long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

OT: wow that medium site is obnoxious.

 

[Larry Martell]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10
long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

OT: wow that medium site is obnoxious.

No company that I work for is using python 3 - they just have too much of
an investment in a python 2 code base to switch. I'm just saying.

 

[Chris Angelico]

No company that I work for is using python 3 - they just have too much of an
investment in a python 2 code base to switch. I'm just saying.

And that's not a problem. Every whinging blog author seems to forget
that Python 2.7 support is going to continue for a long time! Yes, you
won't get new features. But the recommendation is "new and unfettered
projects should take advantage of Python 3", not "every Python 2
project needs to be ported". There've been some recent discussions
about exactly what security fixes and improvements can be backported;
the underlying guiding principle is "it's acceptable and expected that
there will be large, net-facing Python 2 applications for the
foreseeable future".

Or maybe the complaint is that there are fancy new features in Python
3.x that aren't in 2.7? Oh wait, that directly contradicts the whine.
So if Python 3 has added nothing, what's the rush to move onto it?

Whiners gonna whine.

ChrisA

 

[Mark Lawrence]

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Paul Rubin <[email protected]

Larry Martell <[email protected]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10
long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

OT: wow that medium site is obnoxious.


No company that I work for is using python 3 - they just have too much
of an investment in a python 2 code base to switch. I'm just saying.

So you're happy because you've support until at least 2020, and the
people using Python 3 are happy, mainly because of the vastly improved
unicode handling via the FSR and asyncio in 3.4. Presumably the only
unhappy people are those who keep bleating on about forking Python to
produce a 2.8, or has work on this already started without my knowledge?

 

[Paul Rubin]

There are many large companies still using FORTRAN and COBOL because of
a large investment in those languages, which are far more outdated than
Python 2. What's your point?

I think some of us see Python 2 as perfectly fine--we've looked into
Python 3 and found some minor improvements along with some minor
breakage, and figure it's not worth the cognitive burden of switching
from something that already works, even if Python 3 is slightly better
in the scheme of things.

While I'm sure it will change over time, I currently don't actually know
anyone using Python 3 even for new projects. I know *of* people using
Python 3 including here on this newsgroup, but I'm currently not
personally acquainted with any of them.

 

[Terry Reedy]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10

This makes the same false claim "It’s not like anyone is using Python 3
anyway, (so go ahead and bread existing Py3 code". At least some of the
20+ million windows downloads must be in use.

long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

One legitimate request is better installation of dependencies, which is
in progress. This is not a 2 versus 3 issue, unless there are 3-only
improvement.

Some want concurrency primitives like go has. Guido went for a new
module instead. I don't know what the importand differences are.

Some want a better REPL, including color. The Idle shell already has the
syntax colorizing. I don't know what else might have been meant.

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

In my opinion, about the best non-developer blog on Python 3 -- by a
sensible, satisfied user. "in March 2014 Python 3 downloads overtook
Python 2 downloads by a healthy margin 54% vs 46%." OK, that was boosted
by the release of 3.4. But the point still stands.

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10
long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

OT: wow that medium site is obnoxious.

No company that I work for is using python 3 - they just have too much
of an investment in a python 2 code base to switch. I'm just saying.

Is that Python 2 code base aimed at Python 2.7 or 2.6? Or 2.5? Or 2.4? Or
even 2.3? Or all of the above?

One of the most pernicious myths about this is that there is one single
Python 2 ecosystem. There isn't. The company I work for is stuck with 2.6
for the foreseeable future, because that's the version of Python provided
by the OS of choice. I recently migrated a client's code base from 2.3 to
2.6, and they will likely stay with 2.6 forever. And I know of at least
one company who is using Python 1.5 (yes, 1.5) and have no plans to
migrate. 1.5 works for them, and they apparently don't need or don't care
about security updates, so why should they migrate?

This is all good. If 2.x works for your application, and you don't care
about all the awesome new features in 3.3+, don't care about bug fixes
and security updates, and don't mind being stuck with a version of Python
that will slowly but surely become more and more obsolete, more power to
you.

The Python core developers have recent committed to providing security
updates for 2.7 until 2020. And Redhat have paid support for 2.7 until
2023. So there's no rush.

But anyone who makes that decision to stay with 2.x forever is in the
same position as those who stay with 1.5 forever. Eventually, you'll have
no OS support, no vendor support, no security updates, no bug fixes, it
will become harder and harder to find programmers who know that
particular version of the language, and even harder to find third party
libraries that support it, training new staff in the obsolete version
will be hard because all the books and tutorials will be written for more
recent versions...

My prediction is:

- over the next three or four years, there will be a steady trickle of
people complaining about Python 3, slowly fading as more people move to
Python 3;

- when the main Linux distros start using Python 3 as their system
Python, there will be a sudden rush of people to Python 3;

- about six months before Python 2 drops out of free support, there will
be a sudden flood of panicky cries for help from people who didn't bother
making a *single* step towards migration over the previous ten years, and
suddenly realise that they need to migrate yesterday.

 

[Paul Rubin]

The Python core developers have recent committed to providing security
updates for 2.7 until 2020. And Redhat have paid support for 2.7 until
2023. So there's no rush.

Perhaps Python 4 will be out by then and the Python 2 holdouts can skip
over Python 3.

- over the next three or four years, there will be a steady trickle of
people complaining about Python 3, slowly fading as more people move to
Python 3;
- when the main Linux distros start using Python 3 as their system
Python, there will be a sudden rush of people to Python 3;

This is more realistic--people don't explicitly switch but rather the
stuff that comes with the OS changes.

 

[wxjmfauth]

Le mercredi 28 mai 2014 22:24:15 UTC+2, Mark Lawrence a écrit :

Larry Martell <[email protected]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10

long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

OT: wow that medium site is obnoxious.


No company that I work for is using python 3 - they just have too much

of an investment in a python 2 code base to switch. I'm just saying.

So you're happy because you've support until at least 2020, and the

people using Python 3 are happy, mainly because of the vastly improved

unicode handling via the FSR and asyncio in 3.4. Presumably the only

unhappy people are those who keep bleating on about forking Python to

produce a 2.8, or has work on this already started without my knowledge?



--

My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask

what you can do for our language.



Mark Lawrence

===========

Unicode: a reason to not use Python.

jmf

 

[Larry Martell]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:
[1]https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10
long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

OT: wow that medium site is obnoxious.

No company that I work for is using python 3 - they just have too much
of an investment in a python 2 code base to switch. I'm just saying.

Is that Python 2 code base aimed at Python 2.7 or 2.6? Or 2.5? Or 2.4? Or
even 2.3? Or all of the above?

One company is using 2.5. Another has been using 2.6 but they are moving to
2.7 because it's required by a package they need. I think that will be the
driving force for companies to upgrade.

 

[Steve Hayes]

Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:

https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/

I just bought a new book on Python, since the one I had borrowed from my son
only dealt with Python 2.3, and everyone told me that was old.

So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it deals
with, that's the one I will download and use.

The book is:

Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours.
Indianapolis: Sams.
ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4
For Python 2.7.5

I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm installing
now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't afford
to but yet another Python book.

 

[Johannes Bauer]

So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it deals
with, that's the one I will download and use.

This sounds like remarkably bad advice. That's like saying "I bought a
can of motor oil in my department store and whatever engine that is good
for that's the car that I'll buy and put into!"

The book is:

Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours.
Indianapolis: Sams.
ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4
For Python 2.7.5

I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm installing
now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't afford
to but yet another Python book.

Lucky for you 2.7.5 isn't all that different from Py3 and most of it
will apply. You'll be missing out on a bunch of cool features (arbitrary
precision ints, int division operator, real Unicode support) but that's
no big deal.

Regards,
Johannes

--

Zumindest nicht öffentlich!

Ah, der neueste und bis heute genialste Streich unsere großen
Kosmologen: Die Geheim-Vorhersage.
- Karl Kaos über Rüdiger Thomas in dsa <[email protected]>

 

[Stefan Behnel]

Johannes Bauer, 31.05.2014 13:09:

Lucky for you 2.7.5 isn't all that different from Py3 and most of it
will apply. You'll be missing out on a bunch of cool features (arbitrary
precision ints

Py2 has them as well (although they are called long). 1 << 300 gives the
right answer in both Py2 and Py3, whether the result is a "long" or an "int".

int division operator

AFAIR, that was added in Py2.5, so a book about Py2.7 should mention it
somewhere.

real Unicode support

Now, that is really something that has improved in Py3, and certainly a
reason for many people to prefer Py3 over Py2.

Stefan

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm
installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python
3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book.

Version 2.7 is a good choice, and it will be around for a long time: it
will be supported until at least 2020, so you should get many years of
use from it.

Do not be discouraged about Python 3. There are differences, but they
aren't so different as to be a major barrier. By the time you have a bit
of experience with 2.7, you will be more than capable of dealing with the
differences with version 3. They are not different languages, think of
them as slightly different dialects of the same language, like UK and
South African English.

 

[Marko Rauhamaa]

I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm
installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python
3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book.

Unfortunately, in the computer field, if there's a book written on a
topic, it will most likely be out of date.

In the 1990's, I used to buy computer books on various topics. I don't
think I have bought one for ten years. Either it is online or it doesn't
exist.

There's enough Python material online to become a pro in it:

* tutorials,

* the complete language reference,

* the complete library reference,

* the complete reference implementation,

* this discussion group.


Marko

 

[wxjmfauth]

Le samedi 31 mai 2014 14:30:11 UTC+2, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :

Version 2.7 is a good choice, and it will be around for a long time: it

will be supported until at least 2020, so you should get many years of

use from it.



Do not be discouraged about Python 3. There are differences, but they

aren't so different as to be a major barrier. By the time you have a bit

of experience with 2.7, you will be more than capable of dealing with the

differences with version 3. They are not different languages, think of

them as slightly different dialects of the same language, like UK and

South African English.

======

At least Py2 does not crash when using non ascii
(eg sticking with cp1252).

I just noticed this last week, Thursday, when presenting
the absurdity of the Flexible String Representation.

jmf

 

[Deb Wyatt]

I just bought a new book on Python, since the one I had borrowed from my
son
only dealt with Python 2.3, and everyone told me that was old.

So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it
deals
with, that's the one I will download and use.

The book is:

Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours.
Indianapolis: Sams.
ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4
For Python 2.7.5

I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm
installing
now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't
afford
to but yet another Python book.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
uk

In my search for information to learn about object oriented programming, since I come from a pre oop background, I found this site: http://it-ebooks.info/

tons of free books, many fairly up-to-date. A wealth of knowledge for the do it yourself learner.

Hope this is helpful to you.

Deb in WA, USA

____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium

 

[Steve Hayes]

This sounds like remarkably bad advice. That's like saying "I bought a
can of motor oil in my department store and whatever engine that is good
for that's the car that I'll buy and put into!"

No, it's a bit like flying in a Boeing 747 rather than a Concorde. The latyer
may be later and more technically advanced and flew faster, but no one uses or
supports it.

Lucky for you 2.7.5 isn't all that different from Py3 and most of it
will apply. You'll be missing out on a bunch of cool features (arbitrary
precision ints, int division operator, real Unicode support) but that's
no big deal.

I'm prepared to forgo whatever advantages those may have to avoid the
frustration of example code not working and not knowing why.