3 ms·
Oh come on. Hyperbole much? You're acting as if it's impossible to write any sort of meaningful code in 3.x without embracing asyncio. A few 2to3-ish language c
by hyperbovine 10y ago
Oh come on. Hyperbole much? You're acting as if it's impossible to write any sort of meaningful code in 3.x without embracing asyncio. A few 2to3-ish language changes excepted, you can punch the exact same code into the Python 3.x interpreter that you have been for the past 15 years.
- carapace 10y agoNot much. I agree with coleifer (and others) that Python 3 is losing "the zen". The new f-string stuff is a perfect example: a bad, retrogressive idea that never should have been approved. I have no plans to adopt or use Python 3.
- mixmastamyk 10y ago> The new f-string stuff is a perfect example: a bad, retrogressive idea that never should have been approved. A convenience that is present in every other modern (and not-so modern) language except python? Hardly.
- rat87 10y agoAre you kidding? Interpolated strings are awesome. Only problem is that they weren't introduced in python 3.1 so you could drop the f
- tedmiston 10y agoI have mixed feelings about f strings. Having the string literal bound to the variable name feels kind of backwards -- that one could break interpolated strings inadvertently by refactoring a variable name. On the other the str.format syntax is a bit verbose, even in shorthand notation. That said, I use Python 3 every day for almost everything without need to use every shiny new feature.
- Too 10y agoIt's Python we are talking about right? Refactoring a variable name in a non type safe language has always been prone to break something. If you trust your IDE to do refactoring on that level I would also trust it would rename inside the string.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]