3 ms·

It took 14 years to go from Python 3 being released to Python 2.7 finally being officially sunset. A date that was pushed back multiple years because there was

It took 14 years to go from Python 3 being released to Python 2.7 finally being officially sunset. A date that was pushed back multiple years because there was such a strong python 2 holdout. And Python 3 is the success story here. You could instead easily end up being Perl 6 instead.

_aavaa_ 4y ago
I see your point, and I don't even disagree with it really. I don't know the history of python and why they needed to make all of the changes at once, rather than gradually deprecating features and then eventually removing them. I will reiterate my point from a sibling comment: always adding layers but never removing anything is going to get incredibly complex. The complexity will only ever grow. That complexity is a cost and a risk just as much as alienating a large part of your community is. Imagine the miles and miles of detritus that will be in the C++2122 if nothing has ever been removed in the name of backwards compatibility.
- kllrnohj 4y ago
  The web hasn't removed anything and it's still going strong despite dozens if not hundreds of deprecated features. Windows has barely removed things and similarly is going strong. Backwards compatibility is an extremely powerful and desirable feature. There's other ways to keep the working set of complexity in check without losing compatibility (eg linters, modernizers, or profiles)
  - _aavaa_ 4y ago
    A) "The web" is not some unified thing so having a certain web technology come and go is categorically different than a language deprecating features. B) I wouldn't exactly hold up "the web" and Windows as shining examples of things are going great. Even just using Windows you can see the complexity escaping control, for example there's 3 separate ways in which to change volume for sound devices on windows. Each one with a different UI and found in a different place. To say nothing of attempting to develop on it. As for the web, companies like Mighty[0], whose whole shtick is "the web and the browser you need are too bloated and slow in order to run on your actual machine. The obvious solution is to add another layer and run that browser in a virtual server and pipe the screen back to you", are getting backed and people see as a "solution". This is madness. C) > There's other ways to keep the working set of complexity in check without losing compatibility (eg linters, modernizers, or profiles) That's a "solution" only in so far as you don't consider all of those things are yet another layer of complexity that we're adding on. [0]: https://www.mightyapp.com https://www.mightyapp.com

_aavaa_ 4y ago

I see your point, and I don't even disagree with it really. I don't know the history of python and why they needed to make all of the changes at once, rather than gradually deprecating features and then eventually removing them. I will reiterate my point from a sibling comment: always adding layers but never removing anything is going to get incredibly complex. The complexity will only ever grow. That complexity is a cost and a risk just as much as alienating a large part of your community is. Imagine the miles and miles of detritus that will be in the C++2122 if nothing has ever been removed in the name of backwards compatibility.

kllrnohj 4y ago
The web hasn't removed anything and it's still going strong despite dozens if not hundreds of deprecated features. Windows has barely removed things and similarly is going strong. Backwards compatibility is an extremely powerful and desirable feature. There's other ways to keep the working set of complexity in check without losing compatibility (eg linters, modernizers, or profiles)
- _aavaa_ 4y ago
  A) "The web" is not some unified thing so having a certain web technology come and go is categorically different than a language deprecating features. B) I wouldn't exactly hold up "the web" and Windows as shining examples of things are going great. Even just using Windows you can see the complexity escaping control, for example there's 3 separate ways in which to change volume for sound devices on windows. Each one with a different UI and found in a different place. To say nothing of attempting to develop on it. As for the web, companies like Mighty[0], whose whole shtick is "the web and the browser you need are too bloated and slow in order to run on your actual machine. The obvious solution is to add another layer and run that browser in a virtual server and pipe the screen back to you", are getting backed and people see as a "solution". This is madness. C) > There's other ways to keep the working set of complexity in check without losing compatibility (eg linters, modernizers, or profiles) That's a "solution" only in so far as you don't consider all of those things are yet another layer of complexity that we're adding on. [0]: https://www.mightyapp.com https://www.mightyapp.com