4 ms·
> They will get ported eventually. This is what worries me about Python: Python3 has been stable for a long while now, yet major projects (SciPy, Django) remai
by TrevorBurnham 16y ago
> They will get ported eventually.
This is what worries me about Python: Python3 has been stable for a long while now, yet major projects (SciPy, Django) remain on 2.x, with no clear deadline for being ported to Python 3.
Contrast this to Ruby, where Rails 3 is 1.8-compatible but recommends 1.9. Ruby 1.9 is being used in production even though it's not completely stable yet. In short, Ruby is clearly evolving, major libraries are constantly being updated for the latest version of the language, and everyone in the Ruby community has a strong sense of "getting better all the time."
Python 3 is a better language than Python 2. That it's taken so long to become the canonical version makes me wonder about Python's future.
- klodolph 16y agoI don't think the circumstances compare. Python 3.x is different in a bunch of little ways from 2.x. Just like you say Rails 3 runs on Ruby 1.8 and 1.9, most Python libraries will run on 2.5, 2.6, or 2.7 (often 2.4 as well) without modification. Python 3.x breaks these libraries. Python 2.7 is also several months newer than Python 3.1. It reminds me of the 2.4 -> 2.6 transition for the Linux kernel. People were using 2.4 for a long time. Heck, you can still find Linux 2.4 in the wild.
- kjhghjklkjmn 16y ago>Ruby 1.9 is being used in production even though it's not completely stable yet That's the difference. Without being insulting, Ruby is used for web sites that don't matter - if your twitter feed about twilight goes down nobody cares. Python also gets used for stuff where a lot of $$$ dissapear if it goes too wrong