13 ms·
> (1) even after large libraries support 3 there will still be a long tail of libraries that aren't ported (and will never be) That should be a non-issue unle
by fractalb 10y ago
> (1) even after large libraries support 3 there will still be a long tail of libraries that aren't ported (and will never be)
That should be a non-issue unless you require one of those libraries.
> There's no must-have feature for us to justify that effort, so we won't be making the switch for the foreseeable future.
There's no reason for making the switch if you're going to ditch your code base in the foreseeable future. Otherwise, you'll have to justify your decision in the unforeseeable future. And thereafter.
- bendmorris 10y ago>That should be a non-issue unless you require one of those libraries. That's kind of a truism, isn't it? I don't understand the dismissiveness - there's certainly a sizable portion of users that use libraries other than the top 50 most popular.
- m45t3r 10y agoThere is ton of new interesting libraries being compatible with Python 3 only, so you can make this argument in either way. In the end, you should ask yourself some questions: Am I starting a new project or continuing an older one? If the former one, Python 3 should be preferred unless some library I need is only available for Python 2. If the latter, I should ask if the cost of migrating my codebase makes sense. If not, Python 2 is still a viable choice until 2020 at least.