4 ms·

An improvement that was not worth the cost. I guess many people aren't looking forward python 4.

anakaine 4y ago
I tend to disagree on no other basis than I've found python 3 to be a lot friendlier to use than python 2. Also, a number of scripts I have operate quicker under python 3, not by a lot, but its still a small win.
nurettin 4y ago
Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module. The other half is probably waiting for speed improvements.
- coldtea 4y ago
  >Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module Hardly. The majority of Python users don't use the typing module.
  - nurettin 4y ago
    Oh you went for number of programmers, that isn't what I meant (obviously). Think influence. Think dropbox, uber, amazon. And think stripe trying to add type annotations to ruby. This is what I meant.
    - coldtea 4y ago
      Well, Dropbox, Uber and Amazon used Python way before the typing module... and many others, including Google. They might want it in (and helped add it), but it's not what made them use Python.
      - nurettin 4y ago
        Okay, I will spell it out: large companies require robust code and typing provides it.
        coldtea 4y ago
        Okay, my $0.02 cents: this is mostly a periodic trend. Large companies had static codebases and switched many codebases to dynamic types circa 2000-2010. And we've even been to the same circle before: a lot of programming the 60s and 70s was untyped, then they switched to typed C++, Delphi and then Java.
    - hyperbovine 4y ago
      Just so I understand: “half the world” is now a measure of influence, not people? And this is supposed to be obvious?
      - petercooper 4y ago
        Being very generous to /u/nurettin, I think maybe they mean that the use of said module by a particularly influential group of developers has the byproduct of broader Python use by folks who might not use said module. I see some mild sense in this argument given how TypeScript has taken off and dispersed into audiences who wouldn't ordinarily be interested in such a thing. I'm not sure it works in the Python world though, since Python's latter day upward trajectory is probably more oriented around heavy use in education, science, ML, PyTorch, et al?
    - School-Cotton 4y ago
      > that isn’t what I meant (obviously) It was not at all obvious from your post.
- Jasper_ 4y ago
  There was nothing stopping them from adding the typing module and syntax to Python 2. The issue was more or less the forced painful backwards compatibility break; in hindsight, that could have been avoided while giving us still a lot of new goodies.

I tend to disagree on no other basis than I've found python 3 to be a lot friendlier to use than python 2. Also, a number of scripts I have operate quicker under python 3, not by a lot, but its still a small win.

nurettin 4y ago

Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module. The other half is probably waiting for speed improvements.

coldtea 4y ago
>Half the world wouldn't be using python if it wasn't for the typing module Hardly. The majority of Python users don't use the typing module.
- nurettin 4y ago
  Oh you went for number of programmers, that isn't what I meant (obviously). Think influence. Think dropbox, uber, amazon. And think stripe trying to add type annotations to ruby. This is what I meant.
  - coldtea 4y ago
    Well, Dropbox, Uber and Amazon used Python way before the typing module... and many others, including Google. They might want it in (and helped add it), but it's not what made them use Python.
    - nurettin 4y ago
      Okay, I will spell it out: large companies require robust code and typing provides it.
      - coldtea 4y ago
        Okay, my $0.02 cents: this is mostly a periodic trend. Large companies had static codebases and switched many codebases to dynamic types circa 2000-2010. And we've even been to the same circle before: a lot of programming the 60s and 70s was untyped, then they switched to typed C++, Delphi and then Java.
  - hyperbovine 4y ago
    Just so I understand: “half the world” is now a measure of influence, not people? And this is supposed to be obvious?
    - petercooper 4y ago
      Being very generous to /u/nurettin, I think maybe they mean that the use of said module by a particularly influential group of developers has the byproduct of broader Python use by folks who might not use said module. I see some mild sense in this argument given how TypeScript has taken off and dispersed into audiences who wouldn't ordinarily be interested in such a thing. I'm not sure it works in the Python world though, since Python's latter day upward trajectory is probably more oriented around heavy use in education, science, ML, PyTorch, et al?
  - School-Cotton 4y ago
    > that isn’t what I meant (obviously) It was not at all obvious from your post.
Jasper_ 4y ago
There was nothing stopping them from adding the typing module and syntax to Python 2. The issue was more or less the forced painful backwards compatibility break; in hindsight, that could have been avoided while giving us still a lot of new goodies.