5 ms·
One of the arguments against switching to Python 3 has always been that you just don't gain enough to justify the hassle, so maybe 3.5 finally hit that critical
by plorkyeran 10y ago
One of the arguments against switching to Python 3 has always been that you just don't gain enough to justify the hassle, so maybe 3.5 finally hit that critical mass of things people really want.
- StavrosK 10y agoDon't gain enough? Static type checking and asyncio? Sign me up!
- pinaraf 10y agoStatic checking ? Python 3.5 Asyncio ? Python 3.4 If these had been available in Python 3.2 or even better 3.0, the switch would have been far easier for corporate users that need benefits before accepting the cost of change...
- raverbashing 10y ago3.4. gave a good virtualenv by default. That helps a lot
- brianwawok 10y agoI still use normal virtualenv, what am I missing by not using pyenv?
- raverbashing 10y ago3.4 gave us pip installed by default https://docs.python.org/3/library/venv.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/venv.html Before that it would give you an empty venv, not even setuptools Yes, you can use the Python 2 virtualenv on Py 3 but I remember that there were some problems
- takeda 10y agoThe usage is essentially the same, just a different command. Huge benefit though is that if you have Python 3.4+ installed you already have the virtual env and pip installed, so things are much simpler.
- StavrosK 10y agoWhich one is that? I'm not aware of it.
- captainmuon 10y agopython -m venv I'm not sure what the differences are to old virtualenv, but the biggest feature is that it works out of the box as long as you have Python > 3.4. No more googling "how to install virtualenv" or "easy_install pip; pip install virtualenv" stuff.
- rspeer 10y agoUnless you're on Ubuntu, where they ship a non-functional version of venv and require you to "sudo apt install" python-venv to get the working version, defeating the entire point of a simple module in the stdlib that lets you manage your Python environment as a user. The big improvement on 16.04 is at least the error message explains what's going on.
- brettcannon 10y agoThe venv module in the stdlib: https://docs.python.org/3/library/venv.html#module-venv https://docs.python.org/3/library/venv.html#module-venv
- takeda 10y agoin addition to what other wrote you also have pyvenv command which is much convenient way of using it in cli (the usage is same as of virtualenv).
- 912312312 10y agoI would say: Optional type checking outsourced to a third party tool (mypy) that catches perhaps 90% of the errors if you are lucky.
- eeZi 10y agoYou still need something like MyPy to actually validate types. What happened is that there's now a standard for typing annotations - now, PyCharm, MyPy, Wing IDE and anyone else can share the same syntax.
- yeukhon 10y agoI am disappointed in Python core developers when they decided to accept static typing to Python 3. It bothers me more than the formatting PEP.
- twblalock 10y agoIt's optional. How can that possibly bother you? Don't use it if you don't like it.
- xapata 10y agoBecause I'll need to support people that use it and explain it to newbies who read it. More work to do, without much benefit (to me; I understand it has much benefit to some people).
- StavrosK 10y agoIt's only without benefit if you don't write Python. Otherwise, it's like having tests that take almost no effort to write. What's not to love about it?
- xapata 10y agoEdward Tufte might call it chart junk. It reduces the information to ink ratio. I generally get by just fine by choosing good names, so I don't need extra type checking beyond the standard duck typing.
- catdog 10y agoIt's not only optional, it does nothing by default. What was introduced into python is a standardized way to do type annotations. It consists mostly of a new standard library module and as far as i know it doesn't even introduce changes to the language as it uses comments, additional files and the rarely used function annotations. The interpreter happily ignores them anyways but external tools like mypy don't have to invent their own incompatible syntax.