4 ms·

I feel there is too much churn in Python. No-one is ready to say "we're stopping here and bug fixing". It just churns and churns and everyone gets confused. It'

I feel there is too much churn in Python. No-one is ready to say "we're stopping here and bug fixing". It just churns and churns and everyone gets confused. It's too much of a rollercoaster to trust at the moment and I assume this is why a large number of Linux distributions are stuck on 2.6 and 2.7 still.

mxey 14y ago
How are they stuck? Most offer both Python 2 (as python), and Python 3 (as python3). Which makes perfect sense for a new language revision.
- gouranga 14y ago
  I mean default instance. It's not so much as stuck but the fact you end up with several versions that are supported eternally: python, python27, python3, python31, python32, python33. That and half of pypi only works on < python3. Even the JDK isn't that bad.
jmmcd 14y ago
No-one is ready to say "we're stopping here and bug fixing" You didn't notice the moratorium on language changes which was in effect for the last couple of years?
- gouranga 14y ago
  Yes I did, but it's pretty irrelevant as 99%+ of the functionality is in the libraries, not the syntax and ABI.
  - monkeyfacebag 14y ago
    Tell that to Java.
    - gouranga 14y ago
      Java APIs rarely change.
      - monkeyfacebag 14y ago
        Yes, this is the point I was trying to make.
        gouranga 14y ago
        Are you making the point that it's a good or a bad thing? I'm quite happy that they don't change as it means less effort and maintenance cost.
sho_hn 14y ago
> I assume this is why a large number of Linux distributions are stuck on 2.6 and 2.7 still. This doesn't match my experience at all. Most distributions I can think of had no problem replacing 2.6 with 2.7, and have offered fresh Python 3 packages alongside them as well for years now. My distro of choice (Fedora) has dozens of Python 3 libs packaged. Ubuntu is aiming for "no Python 2 in main" by 2014 now, and Arch even switched to Python 3 by default already. I'd go as far as claiming that the distros are actually at the forefront of and partly driving the transition right now.
- gouranga 14y ago
  I'm using stable Debian and RHEL in server environments though. Fedora, Arch and Ubuntu are orders of magnitude too unstable for me to go near and I'm sure the same is true for a lot of other people. More conservative distributions tread very carefully.
  - alex-g 14y ago
    > More conservative distributions tread very carefully. Well, yes, that's what conservative means. You're using stable distros, with older versions of Python, and it sounds from your original post like you're not interested in using newer versions right now. So... what's the problem exactly?
    - gouranga 14y ago
      I would rather like to use newer versions but the rate of change since 3.0 was introduced is slightly scary and hard to quantify. I'd rather not try to hit moving targets. Python appears to be a playground for features versus a stable, reliable well tested and well thought out language these days.
      - sho_hn 14y ago
        I don't think that's really fair, considering they even had a _moratorium_ on language changes in place for two years: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3003/ http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3003/ And as for the standard lib, a lot of the additions e.g. in 3.3 is simply stuff that's been around and proven for years: virtualenv, mock ... I mean, I respect that you feel that way, but I just don't see the same sort of cause for concern I guess.

mxey 14y ago

How are they stuck? Most offer both Python 2 (as python), and Python 3 (as python3). Which makes perfect sense for a new language revision.

gouranga 14y ago
I mean default instance. It's not so much as stuck but the fact you end up with several versions that are supported eternally: python, python27, python3, python31, python32, python33. That and half of pypi only works on < python3. Even the JDK isn't that bad.

jmmcd 14y ago

No-one is ready to say "we're stopping here and bug fixing" You didn't notice the moratorium on language changes which was in effect for the last couple of years?

gouranga 14y ago
Yes I did, but it's pretty irrelevant as 99%+ of the functionality is in the libraries, not the syntax and ABI.
- monkeyfacebag 14y ago
  Tell that to Java.
  - gouranga 14y ago
    Java APIs rarely change.
    - monkeyfacebag 14y ago
      Yes, this is the point I was trying to make.
      - gouranga 14y ago
        Are you making the point that it's a good or a bad thing? I'm quite happy that they don't change as it means less effort and maintenance cost.

sho_hn 14y ago

> I assume this is why a large number of Linux distributions are stuck on 2.6 and 2.7 still. This doesn't match my experience at all. Most distributions I can think of had no problem replacing 2.6 with 2.7, and have offered fresh Python 3 packages alongside them as well for years now. My distro of choice (Fedora) has dozens of Python 3 libs packaged. Ubuntu is aiming for "no Python 2 in main" by 2014 now, and Arch even switched to Python 3 by default already. I'd go as far as claiming that the distros are actually at the forefront of and partly driving the transition right now.

gouranga 14y ago
I'm using stable Debian and RHEL in server environments though. Fedora, Arch and Ubuntu are orders of magnitude too unstable for me to go near and I'm sure the same is true for a lot of other people. More conservative distributions tread very carefully.
- alex-g 14y ago
  > More conservative distributions tread very carefully. Well, yes, that's what conservative means. You're using stable distros, with older versions of Python, and it sounds from your original post like you're not interested in using newer versions right now. So... what's the problem exactly?
  - gouranga 14y ago
    I would rather like to use newer versions but the rate of change since 3.0 was introduced is slightly scary and hard to quantify. I'd rather not try to hit moving targets. Python appears to be a playground for features versus a stable, reliable well tested and well thought out language these days.
    - sho_hn 14y ago
      I don't think that's really fair, considering they even had a _moratorium_ on language changes in place for two years: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3003/ http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3003/ And as for the standard lib, a lot of the additions e.g. in 3.3 is simply stuff that's been around and proven for years: virtualenv, mock ... I mean, I respect that you feel that way, but I just don't see the same sort of cause for concern I guess.