3 ms·
> I'm still writing valid 2.7 code that could be migrated to 3.x at any point Well, that's kinda true, although there is somewhat of a learning curve doing 2-t
by cname 11y ago
> I'm still writing valid 2.7 code that could be migrated to 3.x at any point
Well, that's kinda true, although there is somewhat of a learning curve doing 2-to-3 migrations. Depending on your situation, this may or may not matter, but if you need to "move fast" on this at some point, it'd at least be beneficial to know what's involved (even though it's not that onerous IMO).
- BuckRogers 11y agoI've used (tested) Python3 many times over the years and releases. I'd consider the changes trivial. I'm not anti-Python3, I'm pro-PyPy4. In my attempts to test Python3 releases though I've ran across bugs and performance regressions from 2.x. After I continually ran into this in a few releases I eventually threw my hands up. The last release I ran tests on was 3.4 and I'm no longer interested in later releases until something as substantial as PyPy's CPU performance and removal of the GIL (PyPySTM) shows up to beat what I have now. It's slick to have the entire Python2 ecosystem, major performance boost to your code, and still leave the door open for Python3 if they ever stop bloating the language. Other than being dramatically slower than PyPy4, Python3 is also feature soup. I strongly dislike technical churn rather than true technical innovation (which is what PyPy represents). I'm more in line philosophically with Go, I'd prefer to remove features until you're down to a very concise and stable core. Python3 has many negatives, but from my perspective they keep piling on more.