4 ms·

Not a bad idea. It would certainly elevate the project to unforeseen heights and probably turn them (http://www.baroquesoftware.com/ http://www.baroquesoftware.

Not a bad idea. It would certainly elevate the project to unforeseen heights and probably turn them (http://www.baroquesoftware.com/ http://www.baroquesoftware.com/) into very wealthy men while offering a very desired and needed service for many businesses. While harming no one who didn't already harm themselves. More relevant than CPython3 overnight, which is of significant stature. If prestige and money are desirable things, absolute no brainer if they have a business bone in their bodies. It would also secure the future of the stack for everyone concerned with Python3 threatening to cut off Python2. It could also enable a bigger return on those of us who have invested financially into PyPy development. It would certainly snowball even more financial investment. It would then be the CPython3 project's move. Abandon and integrate all the non-breaking Python3 features into 2.7? Or just move forward with a significantly weaker and less relevant project, working against their past selves? I don't think most would really care and it's best they just move away with their own project. Could be on the way judging from the favorable naming convention, PyPy4? Has a nice ring to it. "the Python2.7 compatible release — PyPy 4.0.0 — (`what's new in PyPy4.0.0?`_)" "the Python3.2.5 compatible release — PyPy3 2.4.0 — (what's new in PyPy3 2.4.0?)." The PyPy gods are in an enviable position for sure. If they seize the opportunity it's the chance of a lifetime.

vegabook 11y ago
Couldn't agree more. This could well be Python 4! (though my original comment is going lighter grey by the minute so clearly the Python 3 thought police are out in force this afternoon/evening).
- BuckRogers 11y ago
  I think your ideas are relatively safe here, just don't go to reddit expecting your freethinking Python2 heathenism to be accepted. ;) I'm afraid some of those folks are making there way over here though. I know you're not suggesting use the name Python4 but it would be interesting to know the possible trademark issues. I'd expect Guido and the core devs to get nasty if they called it Python4. It would probably be too close to war. Announcing PyPy an official fork of Python probably already has them hesitating from backlash. In the end, the gain is bigger than any vocal Python3 folks could muster. I think both sides want PyPy pretty bad but currently in reality it's a 2.x advantage. They already have a great name, the implementation and language could be PyPy(4+).
orf 11y ago
Yeah, the best thing they could possibly do right now is to fork Python and make yet another flavour. We already have this 2/3 mess so let's throw another version into the mix just as Py2 seems to be dying. I don't get this hate for Python 3. Yeah some things changed, yeah having a big codebase in Py2 sucks if you don't have the time/resources to switch, but starting new projects in Py3 by default is awesome. Asyncio and async/await are fantastic and worth the switch alone.
- vegabook 11y ago
  Yes, I agree that Python 3 is not that bad to start a new project in. But that's not the problem. The problem is that many of us have a huge investment in Python, and the project is meandering around, borderline-insulting its historic users who still like 2.7, while simultaneously failing to deliver on REAL needs such as performance and GPU support. Instead we get these little tweaks here and there, downright embarrassing PEPs like type annotations, and all this frankly distasteful pressure to move to 3.x using threats of the end-of-the-line for 2.... Basically 3 gives us lots of headaches, very marginal improvements, an ivory-tower sense of "we know best" (message to Guido - no you don't), and a real concern that the powers that be have no clue what's going on at Golang Towers, Fort Javascript, not to mention Clojure, Julia, or even Elixir.
maxerickson 11y ago
They are already willing to take money to work on Python 2.7 stuff, how does refusing to take money for Python 3 stuff lead to them making more money?
- vegabook 11y ago
  It would show leadership. Leadership which is demonstrably lacking in the 3.x line. Thus they could take a (risky but calculated) bet to take over Python completely.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

vegabook 11y ago

Couldn't agree more. This could well be Python 4! (though my original comment is going lighter grey by the minute so clearly the Python 3 thought police are out in force this afternoon/evening).

BuckRogers 11y ago
I think your ideas are relatively safe here, just don't go to reddit expecting your freethinking Python2 heathenism to be accepted. ;) I'm afraid some of those folks are making there way over here though. I know you're not suggesting use the name Python4 but it would be interesting to know the possible trademark issues. I'd expect Guido and the core devs to get nasty if they called it Python4. It would probably be too close to war. Announcing PyPy an official fork of Python probably already has them hesitating from backlash. In the end, the gain is bigger than any vocal Python3 folks could muster. I think both sides want PyPy pretty bad but currently in reality it's a 2.x advantage. They already have a great name, the implementation and language could be PyPy(4+).

orf 11y ago

Yeah, the best thing they could possibly do right now is to fork Python and make yet another flavour. We already have this 2/3 mess so let's throw another version into the mix just as Py2 seems to be dying. I don't get this hate for Python 3. Yeah some things changed, yeah having a big codebase in Py2 sucks if you don't have the time/resources to switch, but starting new projects in Py3 by default is awesome. Asyncio and async/await are fantastic and worth the switch alone.

vegabook 11y ago
Yes, I agree that Python 3 is not that bad to start a new project in. But that's not the problem. The problem is that many of us have a huge investment in Python, and the project is meandering around, borderline-insulting its historic users who still like 2.7, while simultaneously failing to deliver on REAL needs such as performance and GPU support. Instead we get these little tweaks here and there, downright embarrassing PEPs like type annotations, and all this frankly distasteful pressure to move to 3.x using threats of the end-of-the-line for 2.... Basically 3 gives us lots of headaches, very marginal improvements, an ivory-tower sense of "we know best" (message to Guido - no you don't), and a real concern that the powers that be have no clue what's going on at Golang Towers, Fort Javascript, not to mention Clojure, Julia, or even Elixir.

maxerickson 11y ago

They are already willing to take money to work on Python 2.7 stuff, how does refusing to take money for Python 3 stuff lead to them making more money?

vegabook 11y ago
It would show leadership. Leadership which is demonstrably lacking in the 3.x line. Thus they could take a (risky but calculated) bet to take over Python completely.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]