5 ms·
The changes from Python 2.7 to 3.x are hardly so dramatic that it's like learning a new language. I'm pretty sure your performance issues can largely be address
by thijsvandien 8y ago
The changes from Python 2.7 to 3.x are hardly so dramatic that it's like learning a new language. I'm pretty sure your performance issues can largely be addressed after proper investigation where the bottlenecks are. I do understand how nice it is to have a simpler architecture, but make sure it's worth all the work.
- jojo64 8y agoWell we can migrate to python 3 but this will be more investment in a stack that is more and more obsolete (Django) for SPA. Developers need also to learn the new best practices for python 3. At the end this will result in short term with python 3 code base written in python 2 style without the benefits of typing etc. Investment without benefits except keep our stack up-to-date. Each solution for Python/Django add complexity: - async -> celery/rabbitmq - websocket -> Channels, Daphne, asgiref, channels_redis, redid. It's quite huge to manage.
- collyw 8y agoDjango obselete? Sure....
- jojo64 8y agoFor our usage that's my point of view. When you need to manage ws & asynchronous task, you are just ending stacking technologies to make Django enter in 2018 (remember tornado?). I would say that the framework didn't followed technology evolution and so our new requirements For old good stuff is still a good framework. It really depends on your usage.