4 ms·

> Tons of other languages have version requirements as part of their end user experience. That does not dispute the original claim though. It's still a problem

> Tons of other languages have version requirements as part of their end user experience. That does not dispute the original claim though. It's still a problem for Python even when other languages have the same problem. > or Perl language versions being breaking Perl 5.0 code written in 1999 will still happily run in 2023. In part due to the fact that breaking changes are *opt-in* within a Perl script. Reference: https://www.perl.com/article/announcing-perl-7/ https://www.perl.com/article/announcing-perl-7/ """Perl 7.0 is going to be v5.32 but with different, saner, more modern defaults. [..] Perl 5 still has Perl 5’s extreme backward compatibility behavior, but Perl 7 gets modern practice with minimal historical baggage. """ Honestly, Perl is an example of extreme backwards compatibility that has the user experience at the forefront of their design decisions.

dagmx 4y ago
I’m not trying to dispute whether it’s a problem. I agree it’s a problem. I’m saying that avoiding Python because of it is illogical (to me) because the problems they’re describing aren’t unique to Python, and I don’t think there’s much that doesn’t suffer from it. Perl is an odd one because, as your comment says, Perl is going 5->7 because 6 was such a disastrous break.
- bloblaw 4y ago
  > I’m not trying to dispute whether it’s a problem. I agree it’s a problem. ack > I’m saying that avoiding Python because of it is illogical (to me) because the problems they’re describing aren’t unique to Python, and I don’t think there’s much that doesn’t suffer from it. I don't completely agree, but I see your point. Any interpreted language (or non-statically linked binaries) could (and does) suffer from these problems. I'd like to see Python have a better packaging story...but for now we live with shipping the developers environment (via docker or virtualenv) for running complex Python applications and services. I will say that *statically linked* compiled languages are able to avoid many of these problems because running these binaries typically only requires the OS (eg, Go, Nim, Rust, Zig, C/C++ when statically linked, Object-Pascal, etc) > Perl is going 5->7 because 6 was such a disastrous break. Agree. And they did the right thing by actually renaming it Raku and skipping the version release.
  - w0m 4y ago
    slight correction >Agree. And they did the right thing by actually renaming it Raku and skipping the version release. should be >Agree. And they did the right thing by actually renaming it Raku and functionally killing the language.

dagmx 4y ago

I’m not trying to dispute whether it’s a problem. I agree it’s a problem. I’m saying that avoiding Python because of it is illogical (to me) because the problems they’re describing aren’t unique to Python, and I don’t think there’s much that doesn’t suffer from it. Perl is an odd one because, as your comment says, Perl is going 5->7 because 6 was such a disastrous break.

bloblaw 4y ago
> I’m not trying to dispute whether it’s a problem. I agree it’s a problem. ack > I’m saying that avoiding Python because of it is illogical (to me) because the problems they’re describing aren’t unique to Python, and I don’t think there’s much that doesn’t suffer from it. I don't completely agree, but I see your point. Any interpreted language (or non-statically linked binaries) could (and does) suffer from these problems. I'd like to see Python have a better packaging story...but for now we live with shipping the developers environment (via docker or virtualenv) for running complex Python applications and services. I will say that *statically linked* compiled languages are able to avoid many of these problems because running these binaries typically only requires the OS (eg, Go, Nim, Rust, Zig, C/C++ when statically linked, Object-Pascal, etc) > Perl is going 5->7 because 6 was such a disastrous break. Agree. And they did the right thing by actually renaming it Raku and skipping the version release.
- w0m 4y ago
  slight correction >Agree. And they did the right thing by actually renaming it Raku and skipping the version release. should be >Agree. And they did the right thing by actually renaming it Raku and functionally killing the language.