6 ms·

>(Yes, I'm still on Python 2 but moving soon). I'm like really new to programming and I'm still just learning the basics, but I see this little addendum a lot

by kj01a 10y ago

>(Yes, I'm still on Python 2 but moving soon). I'm like really new to programming and I'm still just learning the basics, but I see this little addendum a lot from people who say everyone should be writing Python 3.

kstrauser 10y ago
Here, I'll give you a counterexample: We're on Python 3 for all new stuff, and are migrating the old whenever we can.
wiz21c 10y ago
me too. I've migrated a big project from 2 to 3 two years ago. And let's get this straight : innovation happens on python 3. So staying on 2 would feel like riding a dead horse. I know I did the right thing. And if Google can make an interpreter for 2, then sooner or later, one for 3 will pop up. Since Google made some restrictions on what Grumpy supports from python 2, I'm sure someone somewhere will be able to do the same stuff for three.
joatmon-snoo 10y ago
Python 2.7 is EOL in 2020. Make of that what you will :/
- loeg 10y ago
  The community will fork the 2.7 codebase and continue to support it, even if Python.org EOLs it.
  - xrange 10y ago
    It looks like all Python 2.8 is missing is a new name: https://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/why-making-python-2.8/ https://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/why-making-python-2.8/
  - ensignavenger 10y ago
    I can see "the community" doing security fixes, maybe some bug fixing and a few back ports, but so far I havn't seen much effort from any community to bring active development of new features.
    - loeg 10y ago
      It seems like the 2.7 community is happy enough without the new features -- just need the bugfixes and continued backwards compatibility to keep that segment happy. From a new features perspective, the other reply's Placeholder is fascinating. (I haven't looked into it thoroughly yet.)
      - ensignavenger 10y ago
        It is certainly interesting if it truly materializes. But it looks like the plan is to mostly backport stuff from py3- so py3 is still the future, with Placeholder getting some of those features eventually. And that is great from a legacy codebase perspective.
        loeg 10y ago
        Right.
- coldtea 10y ago
  That means nothing. Python 3 was also expected to be mainstream by 2015, but it's nowhere near even 30% yet.
  - orf 10y ago
    It's mainstream for new projects. Which is what was expected and aimed for.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      Citation needed. Most companies I know that have 2.7 older projects also do new projects in 2.7. They don't want to introduce 2 different versions of the language, set of dependencies etc to their production.
      - jwillp 10y ago
        absolutely true. imagine porting a decade or more of code for only the promised benefit of a more "pure" language. asyncio is nice, but excluding it and enhanced generator syntax from 2.7+ is >policy<, not engineering. python 3 is bootheel style top-down engineering >management<, not good engineering. The BFDL is fallible. Placeholder looks like a great Python 2.8+ to me. Runs all my old code and gives me new syntax, without rejiggering the stdlib for purity's sake? Twist my arm.
cdelsolar 10y ago
It's true, but moving our huge codebase to Python 3 is a big undertaking. We're making progress towards it by using Python 3 constructs for new files, etc. For my personal projects I'm already in the process of moving over.
- kj01a 10y ago
  So is it just a time issue, or are there compatibility reasons for why not all of you code is Python 3? I ask because I started to learn to code with Python 2 because that's what was preloaded on my system. Is one over the other a big enough deal at a beginner level that I should switch to 3 now? How much of a learning curve am I in for?
  - johnny22 10y ago
    what system is that? a mac? If so , the sadly you do have to get py3 yourself. If a Linux distro, then you likely already have python 3 preinstalled. `/usr/bin/python` won't point to python3 in anytime in the near future.
    - kj01a 10y ago
      Haha it's Ubuntu. After I downloaded Python 3.6 last night, I found out I had Python 3.4 already on my machine. I got excited about new software and forgot to check. It's a crutch :/
  - mastazi 10y ago
    > Is one over the other a big enough deal at a beginner level No, at a beginner level it's not, there are many guides that explain the differences at a beginner level, and you can go through those in a few hours at most, for example http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html But, if you start working now on a Python 2 project and that project starts growing significantly, then it will be hard to convert the codebase. That's why you can see people saying that they didn't switch yet, it's not that they don't know Python 3, it's that upgrading large legacy code bases is hard (not only in Python).

by kj01a 10y ago

kstrauser 10y ago

Here, I'll give you a counterexample: We're on Python 3 for all new stuff, and are migrating the old whenever we can.

wiz21c 10y ago

me too. I've migrated a big project from 2 to 3 two years ago. And let's get this straight : innovation happens on python 3. So staying on 2 would feel like riding a dead horse. I know I did the right thing. And if Google can make an interpreter for 2, then sooner or later, one for 3 will pop up. Since Google made some restrictions on what Grumpy supports from python 2, I'm sure someone somewhere will be able to do the same stuff for three.

joatmon-snoo 10y ago

Python 2.7 is EOL in 2020. Make of that what you will :/

loeg 10y ago
The community will fork the 2.7 codebase and continue to support it, even if Python.org EOLs it.
- xrange 10y ago
  It looks like all Python 2.8 is missing is a new name: https://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/why-making-python-2.8/ https://www.naftaliharris.com/blog/why-making-python-2.8/
- ensignavenger 10y ago
  I can see "the community" doing security fixes, maybe some bug fixing and a few back ports, but so far I havn't seen much effort from any community to bring active development of new features.
  - loeg 10y ago
    It seems like the 2.7 community is happy enough without the new features -- just need the bugfixes and continued backwards compatibility to keep that segment happy. From a new features perspective, the other reply's Placeholder is fascinating. (I haven't looked into it thoroughly yet.)
    - ensignavenger 10y ago
      It is certainly interesting if it truly materializes. But it looks like the plan is to mostly backport stuff from py3- so py3 is still the future, with Placeholder getting some of those features eventually. And that is great from a legacy codebase perspective.
      - loeg 10y ago
        Right.
coldtea 10y ago
That means nothing. Python 3 was also expected to be mainstream by 2015, but it's nowhere near even 30% yet.
- orf 10y ago
  It's mainstream for new projects. Which is what was expected and aimed for.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Citation needed. Most companies I know that have 2.7 older projects also do new projects in 2.7. They don't want to introduce 2 different versions of the language, set of dependencies etc to their production.
    - jwillp 10y ago
      absolutely true. imagine porting a decade or more of code for only the promised benefit of a more "pure" language. asyncio is nice, but excluding it and enhanced generator syntax from 2.7+ is >policy<, not engineering. python 3 is bootheel style top-down engineering >management<, not good engineering. The BFDL is fallible. Placeholder looks like a great Python 2.8+ to me. Runs all my old code and gives me new syntax, without rejiggering the stdlib for purity's sake? Twist my arm.

cdelsolar 10y ago

It's true, but moving our huge codebase to Python 3 is a big undertaking. We're making progress towards it by using Python 3 constructs for new files, etc. For my personal projects I'm already in the process of moving over.

kj01a 10y ago
So is it just a time issue, or are there compatibility reasons for why not all of you code is Python 3? I ask because I started to learn to code with Python 2 because that's what was preloaded on my system. Is one over the other a big enough deal at a beginner level that I should switch to 3 now? How much of a learning curve am I in for?
- johnny22 10y ago
  what system is that? a mac? If so , the sadly you do have to get py3 yourself. If a Linux distro, then you likely already have python 3 preinstalled. `/usr/bin/python` won't point to python3 in anytime in the near future.
  - kj01a 10y ago
    Haha it's Ubuntu. After I downloaded Python 3.6 last night, I found out I had Python 3.4 already on my machine. I got excited about new software and forgot to check. It's a crutch :/
- mastazi 10y ago
  > Is one over the other a big enough deal at a beginner level No, at a beginner level it's not, there are many guides that explain the differences at a beginner level, and you can go through those in a few hours at most, for example http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html But, if you start working now on a Python 2 project and that project starts growing significantly, then it will be hard to convert the codebase. That's why you can see people saying that they didn't switch yet, it's not that they don't know Python 3, it's that upgrading large legacy code bases is hard (not only in Python).