3 ms·
Py3 feels to me like a massive case of "screw backwards compatibility" for very little gain. I feel like Python the language peaked somewhere between 2.4 and 2
by carapace 5y ago
Py3 feels to me like a massive case of "screw backwards compatibility" for very little gain.
I feel like Python the language peaked somewhere between 2.4 and 2.7.
Python was much slower than most other languages, but in return you got great readability ("runnable pseudocode") and rapid prototyping. Now, with all the additions to the language (more syntax and features, static typing), those advantages are weakening but you're still not getting the advantages of faster compiled languages.
It seems to me that Go or Nim (or D or Zig or ...) are preferable for readability, and that Rust is more worth one's time if you don't mind the complexity.
- musicale 5y agoIn an alternate universe, Python 3 would have - not broken backward compatibility (an astonishing value-destroying move with huge externalities that are still being felt today) - provided a standard and improved packaging system
- 1_player 5y agoI agree 100% with you. I built my career on top of Python, and 2.7 is the last version I've used. I don't like that Python 3 is adding any feature under the sun for whatever reason. Have you seen their sad excuse of pattern match proposal? And packaging is still a bloody mess. There's worse languages, it definitely gets the job done, but I'd rather stick with better languages.