6 ms·
This just adds burden to programming language and library authors. Sure I could almost certainly support Python 2.7 and Python < 3.6 in all my libraries, but it
by Master_Odin 5y ago
This just adds burden to programming language and library authors. Sure I could almost certainly support Python 2.7 and Python < 3.6 in all my libraries, but it introduces more code and shims I've got to maintain. Given I'm not being paid for this work and do it for fun, there's no compelling reason to support the small subset of users that cannot or will not update.
I imagine variations of the above apply to nokogiri and some amount of Ruby core developers.
- fiddlerwoaroof 5y agoI basically stopped writing Python because of the 2 -> 3 transition: the cost of waiting for dependencies to be ready for Python 3 was high enough that it made sense just to switch languages for everything. Python was saved, basically, by it becoming _the_ language for data science in the same time frame. But, this could have very well turned into a Perl 6-style fiasco.