10 ms·

Are the other standards inclusive or repressive?

by MawNicker 10y ago

orf 10y ago
Are you implying Python3 is repressive?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- pooper 10y ago
  > Are you implying Python3 is repressive? I am not GP but I think the xkcd is relevant. OP is delusional if they think "Python" 2.8 is even python. It is not. From what I've read so far, it is a fork of Python 2.7. There is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is calling it Python.
- coldtea 10y ago
  "Port your old code or be left behind when we cut off 2.x line" is.
  - orf 10y ago
    Please please please explain how that is inhibiting or restraining personal freedom. Or how it is inhibiting or preventing the expression or awareness of your thoughts or desires.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      >Or how it is inhibiting or preventing the expression or awareness of your thoughts or desires. How's that difficult to parse? It is stomping on the desire to keep my 2.x userbase AND receive updates for the language.
      - orf 10y ago
        Oh, but you're expressing your thoughts and desires perfectly well though. You want someone else (not you, of course) to maintain Python 2 for you for the princely sum of of £0.00, so that you don't have to do any work on upgrading to Python 3. And when the time finally comes around that those people, who have been maintaining Python 2 for many many years (for free), want to focus their efforts on an easier to maintain and more modern language that actually has a future they are repressing you? Get real.
        coldtea 10y ago
        >Oh, but you're expressing your thoughts and desires perfectly well though. You want someone else (not you, of course) to maintain Python 2 for you for the princely sum of of £0.00, so that you don't have to do any work on upgrading to Python 3. That's how it works with programming language communities. Not everybody is directly involved in maintaining the language, but the whole community has a stake (and a say) in the future of the language. Furthermore, it's not just the core team that's responsible for the success of the language, but also the users and the companies that adopted it. Without those, Python would be some obscure toy language by a Dutch academic, and he wouldn't have a job in Dropbox etc. There are lots of people that have been major contributors to Python's success, including large businesses that employed people like Guido, which also have concerns regarding the switch.
        orf 10y ago
        > That's how it works with programming language communities Not always, python has a BDFL rather than a steering committee. But nonetheless it's the people who actually maintain the language who drive it forward. > but the whole community has a stake (and a say) in the future of the language. Comments like "the core team are repressing me by not updating 2.7" and random people making half-baked 2.8 releases don't help the future of the language. Look, it's simple. Core team doesn't want to update Python 2.x anymore for a large number of good reasons. For some people (including you I assume) this isn't the decision you wanted. But this decision was made years ago. Either move to a different language, update to Python 3 (again, you've had years of warning) or pay for a supported 2.7 version. Or just carry on using 2.7, it's supported until 2020. Bitching about non-existent repression on hacker news archives squat.

Are the other standards inclusive or repressive?

orf 10y ago

Are you implying Python3 is repressive?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
pooper 10y ago
> Are you implying Python3 is repressive? I am not GP but I think the xkcd is relevant. OP is delusional if they think "Python" 2.8 is even python. It is not. From what I've read so far, it is a fork of Python 2.7. There is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is calling it Python.
coldtea 10y ago
"Port your old code or be left behind when we cut off 2.x line" is.
- orf 10y ago
  Please please please explain how that is inhibiting or restraining personal freedom. Or how it is inhibiting or preventing the expression or awareness of your thoughts or desires.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >Or how it is inhibiting or preventing the expression or awareness of your thoughts or desires. How's that difficult to parse? It is stomping on the desire to keep my 2.x userbase AND receive updates for the language.
    - orf 10y ago
      Oh, but you're expressing your thoughts and desires perfectly well though. You want someone else (not you, of course) to maintain Python 2 for you for the princely sum of of £0.00, so that you don't have to do any work on upgrading to Python 3. And when the time finally comes around that those people, who have been maintaining Python 2 for many many years (for free), want to focus their efforts on an easier to maintain and more modern language that actually has a future they are repressing you? Get real.
      - coldtea 10y ago
        >Oh, but you're expressing your thoughts and desires perfectly well though. You want someone else (not you, of course) to maintain Python 2 for you for the princely sum of of £0.00, so that you don't have to do any work on upgrading to Python 3. That's how it works with programming language communities. Not everybody is directly involved in maintaining the language, but the whole community has a stake (and a say) in the future of the language. Furthermore, it's not just the core team that's responsible for the success of the language, but also the users and the companies that adopted it. Without those, Python would be some obscure toy language by a Dutch academic, and he wouldn't have a job in Dropbox etc. There are lots of people that have been major contributors to Python's success, including large businesses that employed people like Guido, which also have concerns regarding the switch.
        orf 10y ago
        > That's how it works with programming language communities Not always, python has a BDFL rather than a steering committee. But nonetheless it's the people who actually maintain the language who drive it forward. > but the whole community has a stake (and a say) in the future of the language. Comments like "the core team are repressing me by not updating 2.7" and random people making half-baked 2.8 releases don't help the future of the language. Look, it's simple. Core team doesn't want to update Python 2.x anymore for a large number of good reasons. For some people (including you I assume) this isn't the decision you wanted. But this decision was made years ago. Either move to a different language, update to Python 3 (again, you've had years of warning) or pay for a supported 2.7 version. Or just carry on using 2.7, it's supported until 2020. Bitching about non-existent repression on hacker news archives squat.