Python 3 is killing Python

[Steve Hayes]

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.

That's more or less what the book said, about why it chose to use 2 rather
than 3.

 

[Steve Hayes]

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topic, it will most likely be out of date.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:

I hate reading stuff online, and find it diffucult to learn anything with that
method. I use MS Word 97 in preference to Libre Office wor Word 2010 (both of
which I have) because I have a book on the first, but not on the others. I
can't read online books in the bath or in bed.

 

[Chris Angelico]

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.

"Conky" is more like Python 1 - nobody uses it now (actually, there
are more people using Python 1.x than flying Concorde), but it had its
place in history.

You're flying in a 747-400, which is fine, but when I want to go to
England, I'd much rather go in a 777-300ER. (And yes, I've flown in
both. Can't remember what model Queenie was, but with the 777s it's
usually an Emirates 300ER.) The 747 is still functional, but no more
functional than its era, and life's a lot better with the newer
aircraft. If you want to start a brand new airline, you won't go for
747s if you can get 777s and A380s for the same price. For those who
have 747s in their fleet, there's no problem - there'll be spare parts
available from the manufacturer until at least donkey's years, and
even after that, you can probably get third-party spare parts from
some ex-Soviet mob (at least, they must be Soviets, why else would
they wear red hats?); but you'll only get the features that were in
the 747s when they were built, plus maybe some minor upgrades to the
ancillary bits and pieces. Sure, you can get some of the fancy
interior pieces that were designed for the 777s (enum, for instance),
but the main hull isn't changing.

So if you want to start a one-man airline (where you're managing the
company, flying the plane, and everything else), do you start by
looking at the relative merits of the 747-400 and 777-300ER and
choosing, or do you poke around in your local second-hand shop for
"Learn To Fly A Jet In Twenty-Four Hours" and see which cockpit it's
showing photos of? There are courses for both types; both aircraft
come with excellent "quick start" guides (see
https://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/ and
https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/ ); and everything you want to ask
about either type can be answered by the team of
(e-mail address removed) people, any hour of the day or night. All
you're doing is picking your technology on the basis of *one*
dead-tree book that you happen to have found. Is that really the most
important deciding point?

ChrisA

 

[Rustom Mody]

So if you want to start a one-man airline (where you're managing the
company, flying the plane, and everything else), do you start by
looking at the relative merits of the 747-400 and 777-300ER

I guess a person starting a one-man airline would be choosing a
7-15 seater and doing short to medium runs.

Are there 7[47]7's in 7-15 seater range <wink>?

And the earlier description of the choice for Word 97 reminded me of one of the 'prophet's' quotes from Illusions:

<<Argue for your limitations and sure enough they are yours>>

[Disclaimer: I was a Richard Bach fan in my youth]

 

[Bob Martin]

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.

Actually, the Concorde preceded the 747, and wasn't as "technically advanced",
it was just faster.

 

[Mark Lawrence]

Actually, the Concorde preceded the 747, and wasn't as "technically advanced",
it was just faster.

I recall Barnes Wallis slagging off the droop nose, but what did he know
about aircraft?

 

[Steve Hayes]

(e-mail address removed) people, any hour of the day or night. All
you're doing is picking your technology on the basis of *one*
dead-tree book that you happen to have found. Is that really the most
important deciding point?

Yes.

 

[Steve Hayes]

Actually, the Concorde preceded the 747, and wasn't as "technically advanced",
it was just faster.

Boeing 747s were in airline service in 1970, Concorde didn't enter service
till 4-5 years later.

Not that it matters, it was just an analogy. I'm pretty certain that Python
2.x preceded Python 3.x

 

[Mark Lawrence]

Boeing 747s were in airline service in 1970, Concorde didn't enter service
till 4-5 years later.

Not that it matters, it was just an analogy. I'm pretty certain that Python
2.x preceded Python 3.x

Clearly you know nothing about the Python time machine

 

[Bob Martin]

Boeing 747s were in airline service in 1970, Concorde didn't enter service
till 4-5 years later.

Concorde design started in the early 50s, 747 mid-to-late 60s.

 

[Ian Kelly]

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.

So have you reported this alleged crash bug to the bug tracker? If not,
then you're not contributing to Python or the discussion here in any useful
way; you're just trolling.

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

So have you reported this alleged crash bug to the bug tracker? If not,
then you're not contributing to Python or the discussion here in any
useful way; you're just trolling.

There's a corollary to Poe's Law that says that a sufficiently advanced
troll is indistinguishable from a crank. Whichever JMF is, please don't
feed him attention.

 

[Roy Smith]

There's a corollary to Poe's Law that says that a sufficiently advanced
troll is indistinguishable from a crank. Whichever JMF is, please don't
feed him attention.

Are we talking Tolkien trolls, Pratchett trolls, Rowling trolls, D&D
trolls, WoW trolls, or what? Details matter.

 

[Chris Angelico]

Are we talking Tolkien trolls, Pratchett trolls, Rowling trolls, D&D
trolls, WoW trolls, or what? Details matter.

Don't forget Frozen trolls, they're love experts!

ChrisA
(Why aren't you running?)

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

Are we talking Tolkien trolls, Pratchett trolls, Rowling trolls, D&D
trolls, WoW trolls, or what? Details matter.

Now I think you're trolling

Internet troll. As I'm sure you know.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Don't_feed_the_Troll

 

[Johannes Bauer]

Are we talking Tolkien trolls, Pratchett trolls, Rowling trolls, D&D
trolls, WoW trolls, or what? Details matter.

Monkey Island trolls, obviously.

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]>

 

[Ian Kelly]

There's a corollary to Poe's Law that says that a sufficiently advanced
troll is indistinguishable from a crank. Whichever JMF is, please don't
feed him attention.

While his description of the bug is so vague that I'm not inclined to
believe that it actually exists, if it's real then he should be
encouraged to report it. This is the last time, though. If he
continues to complain about bugs without reporting or otherwise
identifying them, I'll just ignore it.

 

[Mark Lawrence]

While his description of the bug is so vague that I'm not inclined to
believe that it actually exists, if it's real then he should be
encouraged to report it. This is the last time, though. If he
continues to complain about bugs without reporting or otherwise
identifying them, I'll just ignore it.

It's a pleasant change having him complain about bugs, as opposed to
simply complain about nonexistent problems.

 

[wxjmfauth]

Le lundi 2 juin 2014 17:01:01 UTC+2, Ian a écrit :

So have you reported this alleged crash bug to the bug tracker? If not, then you're not contributing to Python or the discussion here in any useful way; you're just trolling.

------

I was myself really suprised to fall on such a case and
after thinking no, such cases may logically happen.

It's not important. I'm no more writing Py apps, only
considering software through an unicode eye.

jmf

 

[Rustom Mody]

after thinking no

Yes [Also called Oui]