3 ms·
I don't share Alex's concern. The migration to Python 3.X is a slow, but in my opinion sure process. Already many of my small internal programs run on Python 3.
by cool-RR 13y ago
I don't share Alex's concern. The migration to Python 3.X is a slow, but in my opinion sure process. Already many of my small internal programs run on Python 3.4, and I believe that in 1-2 years from now I'll be writing most new Django client projects in Python 3.4 (hopefully running on Pypy3).
- rhizome31 13y agoAgreed. More and more important libraries are being ported to Python 3. I'm working on a web app supporting Python 3.3. I keep it backward-compatible with Python 2.7 just in case I would badly need a library that hasn't yet been ported to Python 3 but it hasn't happened yet and I have good hope that we'll be able to deploy it on Python 3.3. I develop and test locally with Python 3.3 and travis runs my tests against both Python 3.3 and Python 2.7. Every time the Python 2 build breaks it's because of some silly unicode-related problem that has been fixed in Python 3, so it really motivates me to develop with Python 3 from now on.
- marcosdumay 13y agoI was even a bit surprized when he complained that people don't develop for Django using Python 3. There isn't even a year that Django supports it (with a year of "we support, but don't recommend"), and quite a few of its libraries already got ported. Yep, people underestimated the time to migration. So what? I completely agree that migration is happening. Now, let's talk about IPv6...
- baq 13y agoipv6 actually doubles year over year, so it's not that bad. if py3 also doubles year over year, we'll see both making an impact in 5 years or so.