4 ms·
Ah, I see the confusion. In this case, "easily" is relative. The assertion "you could easily write Python 3 compatible code" was in response to the (implied?) a
by weberc2 7y ago
Ah, I see the confusion. In this case, "easily" is relative. The assertion "you could easily write Python 3 compatible code" was in response to the (implied?) assertion "you can't do anything to migrate unless your dependencies are migrated". Perhaps "simply" would have been a better word choice than "easily". To your point, writing 2-3 compatible code has a real cost, but to the GP's point, it's the obvious solution to the "can't do anything until deps are migrated" problem.
- logifail 7y ago> To your point, writing 2-3 compatible code has a real cost, but to the GP's point, it's the obvious solution to the "can't do anything until deps are migrated" problem Q: Ten years ago how would you have explained to your manager that you needed your team to start writing 2-3 compatible code, which obviously takes considerably more time and effort than sticking with 2 compatible code?
- joshuamorton 7y agoIt doesn't take considerably more time. At this point, all the code I write is 2/3 compatible, and the things that annoy me are all py3 only features. Backwards compatibility stuff is pretty easy. Most of the easy problems are easy, and six has solved all the hard ones for like 7 years. And I've been writing some of my code 2/3 compatible since 3.4.