7 ms·
Python 3 "Wall of Shame" Becomes "Wall of Superpowers" Today
- zbowling 14y agoThe big one not on this list (because not in PiP) is SCons.
- vosper 14y agoI'd never heard of this module until now. Have you successfully replaced Make with SCons in your projects?
- chmike 14y agoYes, for my personal projects. It's much better than make. But unfortunately it needs to be installed while make is preinstalled on nearly all unixes. Now I always use qt creator for my personnal projects. It's excellent.
- X-Istence 14y agoThe startup I work for uses scons for all of our projects other than Java/Python. So C++/C mainly. Without it we'd most likely still be pulling our hair out trying to deal with make/cmake/qmake/what have you...
- slurgfest 14y agowaf (a fork of scons) works on Python 3 already.
- zokier 14y agoI don't think waf could be considered a fork of scons > When Thomas Nagy decided that SCons's fundamental issues (most notably the poor scalability) were too complex and time-consuming to fix, he started a complete rewrite which he named Waf.
- wladimir 14y agoThis is why the alternative build systems seem to never catch on. Everyone rolls their own, or forks, or rewrites instead of working together to improve one enough to "disrupt" autotools (though cmake comes close enough...). A sad but common problem in open source development.
- bjourne 14y agoDoes that matter though? SCons is a standalone program and you can easily have parallel versions of Python installed.
- po 14y agoFeature request! I wish this site would let you upload (or copy-paste) a requirements.txt file and then tell you what libraries you need to focus on fixing up for your project.
- jQueryIsAwesome 14y agoHere you go; just paste it in the Javascript Console: https://gist.github.com/4264971 https://gist.github.com/4264971 (FF and Chrome tested) Just drag and drop the "requirements.txt" file over the website and that's it. I sent the gist to the author of the app too (not the submitter) so perhaps he will include it in the code.
- baldfat 14y agoSeems like Plone = 19 entries. That one fix would cut it down almost 40%.
- rbanffy 14y agoPorting Zope 2 would probably equire about a dozen Jim Fultons...
- angersock 14y agoThis could be the year of Python 3.0 on the desk^H^H^H^Hserv^H^H^H^H...looks like we need to keep waiting. Maybe I can one day use Django on 3.0. :( Back to Ruby on Rails, I guess. EDIT: Ruby 2.0 is taking a little while too--I kid because I love. <3 Python folks.
- LVB 14y agoThat day could be today, for Django.
- rozap 14y agoDjango 1.5 is in python 3. Soon it shall be so. Though, MySQL-python, South, and Fabric are still red. South and Fabric make django projects so much easier to deal with, especially once deployed. It will be interesting to see what happens when 1.5 is released. I presume they'll be released along with 1.5, or follow right on the heals of it?
- dlisboa 14y agoRuby 2.0 won't introduce as many incompatibilities, though. Something like the 2to3 tool wouldn't be needed. Most code is just expected to work as is. I'm waiting for Python 3 to become de facto for newer/active libraries. Right now there's still a little standoffish demeanor about Python development for the future. I'd want to write in 3 but some important libraries are still backed up, so you're kinda forced to learn the idiosyncrasies of the porting scenario even though you'll most likely not need to know that 2 years from now when Python 3 is king. Perhaps because the gains from Ruby 1.9 compared to 1.8 were a lot more enticing the community ported the libraries pretty swiftly. I don't see much hurry in the Python community, and some even talk about not porting at all.
- chimeracoder 14y agoFor those who missed the context of the title, the footer of the page: > Note that this subdomain's called "python3wos" - once the status goes beyond 50%, the title of the site automatically becomes "Python 3 Wall of Superpowers". I kid you not.
- fatbird 14y agoArmin Ronacher's essay on the flaws of Python 3 seems to translate to his pet projects lagging on conversion. Which is a pity because they're great small, well-focussed pieces like werkzeug and Flask.
- graue 14y agoAgreed. There is an unofficial Python 3 port of Flask and Werkzeug, apparently[1]. And Armin says he started a “secret branch” a few months ago to explore adding Python 3 support[2], but no news since then. The sense I get from the essay[3] is that Python 3.0/3.1 were quite flawed, but that more recent minor versions have been moving in the right direction. I'll admit I haven't personally done much more with Python 3.x than kick the tires a bit. 1. https://github.com/puzzlet/flask https://github.com/puzzlet/flask 2. https://github.com/mitsuhiko/flask/issues/587 https://github.com/mitsuhiko/flask/issues/587 3. http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2011/12/7/thoughts-on-python3/ http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2011/12/7/thoughts-on-python3/
- lucian1900 14y agoPython 3 is still not useful. It fixes too little for too great a cost. There are much more interesting things to port to (like PyPy).
- pretoriusB 14y agoTo quote the Big Lebowski, "That's like, your opinion". Python 3.3 is a better Python. And what "great cost" does 3 burdens us with anymore? Since most of the lib porting has been done (it's been 5 years out already), there's not much cost to be beared, if any: you just get to use it.
- lucian1900 14y agoMany useful libs still aren't ported and some likely never will be (like Twisted). But more importantly, there is a vast amount of application code out there not ported. If you're working on a py2 project it's even hard to start new projects with py3, since you get no interoperation. Breaking compatibility should have never been done without being able to run both py2 and py3 code in the same process.
- shared4you 14y agoI'm surprised that it doesn't list Matplotlib, which is widely popular and supports Python 3.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoScipy is listed, and maybe matplotlib is considered a subset of scipy. Now that scipy is supported, I'll start taking a look at python 3.
- takluyver 14y agoIt goes by the number of downloads from PyPI. I guess that's lower for matplotlib, because installing it from PyPI usually means compiling from source, which is a pain for something as complex as matplotlib. Many people probably get it from a binary package manager, or from an all-in-one Python distribution like EPD.
- raverbashing 14y agoFunny, not sure how they assemble this table Take gunicorn for example, marked green. On the website it says: Gunicorn requires Python 2.x >= 2.6. Python 3.x support is planned.
- mvzink 14y agoIt says the information is from PyPI, and gunicorn is in the "Python 3" category on PyPI. That might be it. Edit: aha, that's probably the case. At the bottom of the page, it says: > If a module is red though it supports python 3 it's because they don't have the "Programming Language :: Python :: 3" tag.
- chmike 14y agoWhy are the packages not sorted by names ? Tornado not there ? Wtf with the background ?
- andyn 14y agoI assume they're sorted by the number of downloads from the Python packaging index (PyPI). Tornado might be one of those packages people install from their distro's package or download from the parent website rather than via PyPi. As for the background ... <shrugs>