37 ms·
It’s that a lot of the libraries take a while to catch up. 3.10 is pretty good to use lately with PyTorch and numpy, which I mention because they are usually t
by b33j0r 3y ago
It’s that a lot of the libraries take a while to catch up.
3.10 is pretty good to use lately with PyTorch and numpy, which I mention because they are usually the main stragglers I have to track. They are both compiled with your friendly local architecture’s stack.
Pydantic and FastAPI almost fell over because of changes to annotation handling, but woosh. That drama was forestalled.
I think the python 3.3+ series has confused a lot of people because major version improvements have been crammed into the process.
Guido, if you’re reading, we should have just gone to 4 when we changed so many things. I get why we were hesitant of versioning after the str/unicode upgrade broke everyone, but like…
There are versions of 3 that we had to almost immediately deprecate. The javascript community is probably laughing at us.
- nomel 3y agoAs is, it appears to mostly be: major version = backwards compatibly break minor version = forward compatible break I think this is how it has always been, in general. I've seen many new people very confused by python 3 code not running with "python3". The very embarrassing answer is "You can't really know what the minimum python version unless it's documented, or you scan it with an external tool". Is there a reasonable alternative? Pip upgradable transpiler?
- Kwpolska 3y agoCode that works in 3.6 but not in 3.5 is fine within typical compatibility definitions. That said, Python nowadays deprecates things quite often (especially things in the standard library), so if Python wanted to adopt a “major = incompatible” scheme, it would probably go up to Python 10 or so.