3 ms·
There was a call asking for volunteers to continue to support 2.7. There's something like 60K lines of Python code in the project so perhaps coding standards ke
by amypinka 8y ago
There was a call asking for volunteers to continue to support 2.7. There's something like 60K lines of Python code in the project so perhaps coding standards keeping the 3.x-specific syntax to a minimum means the project can continue to support a wide installation base without a great deal of overhead for any would-be 2.7 maintainer.
- orf 8y agoSacrificing the awesome 3.x features (f-strings, typing, metaclasses, object model improvements) to hold onto a deprecated and soon-to-be obsolete version of Python seems bad to me. IMO make a clean cut else it will never end.
- beagle3 8y agoPython 1 already had metaclasses (I remebmer it as "the Don Beaudry hack" or "the Don Beaudry hook", depended on who you asked) Are Python 3 metaclasses a significant change? [0] https://www.python.org/doc/essays/metaclasses/ https://www.python.org/doc/essays/metaclasses/
- orf 8y agoThere are a number of improvements, including how you define them and the things you can do with them. Some of these tie in with other language features, e.g typing.NamedTuple[1]. There is also PEP 487[2], which means you can do more without needing a metaclass. 1. https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#typing.NamedTuple https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html#typing.NamedTu... 2. https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0487/ https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0487/
- oliwarner 8y agoThis isn't sustainable. These new language features make for cleaner, leaner, even faster codebases. Python 2 dinosaurs will need to come to with a Babel-style project to transliterate modern syntax —3to2, if you will— and rebase their code from that. It's going to be hell to maintain.