4 ms·

This is unnecessarily pessimistic. Most of the major packages support Py3k and if they don't it's usually very simple to port over (it usually means combining 2

by Ixiaus 13y ago

This is unnecessarily pessimistic. Most of the major packages support Py3k and if they don't it's usually very simple to port over (it usually means combining 2to3 with some bytestring to string conversion debugging). I'm not in the scientific field so forgive me if I'm being parochial but I've been writing software in Py3k exclusively for a year and half now. Using scientific computing, distributed queue processing, webapp, CLI utilities, etc... [EDIT] Better words.

Stubb 13y ago
The shocker for me was seeing that MySQL-python didn't support v3. And I recall all sorts of problems getting IPython 3 running in Emacs alongside the system version of Python 2. Porting a library to v3 was more than I was willing to bite off and a brand-new user when I had a customer deadline approaching.
- nknighthb 13y ago
  I haven't used MySQL-python in years. It's long bordered on being utterly unmaintained. Use oursql or pymysql.
- Aqwis 13y ago
  I was shocked by MySQL-python not supporting Python 3 as well, but then I discovered that there are several better alternatives to MySQL-python that do support it, such as pymysql. AFAIK it's 99% compatible with MySQL-python.
dded 13y ago
> This is unnecessarily pessimistic Remember, he's looking at using Python for the first time. I work in Perl-heavy environments, and I can assure you that the 2/3 split in Python is a reason that many will give for not using Python at all. It's very different among those who are already comfortable with Python. > Most of the major packages support Py3k and if they don't it's usually very simple to port over For you, maybe. He's just starting with Python. With regards to scientific Python, I took a peek at the install link on the Ipython site. It says that Ipython works with Python 2.6, 2.7, and >= 3.2. That was only mention I saw (in an admittedly casual look) for Python3. All the examples were in Python2.
- AgentConundrum 13y ago
  > the 2/3 split in Python is a reason that many will give for not using Python at all I don't know Python, but I've gone through a few phases where I'll play with it for a bit and then put it back down. (Incidentally, I appear to be entering a "play" phase right now.) I can't explain it exactly, but the 2/3 thing makes me really uneasy about learning the language. On one side, there is Python 2 which is supposed to die in the non-immediate future. I don't need to learn it, particularly since development isn't my primary career at the moment and I'm unlikely to "need" it before I inevitably switch careers back to dev. If I don't need it now, and I don't expect to be in a situation where I need it in the near future, why not go for Python 3 right away? On the other side, Python 3 is the new hotness, and it's the future of the language. It's the heir apparent. It's going to be "the" Python in the nearer-than-you-think future. But it doesn't seem ready. You get the impression that you'll start a greenfield project and then get to a point where you want to drop in a well-known component and you just won't be able to. You also look at the fact that it's been around for over half a decade yet 80% of of respondents to this survey say they use 2 more than 3, 40% have never touched it, and 20% say the whole thing was a bad idea. If you were walking into that environment, would you really be so quick to disregard it? I suppose the answer is to just learn it all and try to keep the differences in mind as you go, but it's understandable the a lot of people don't want to half to learn and semi-unlearn the same language all at once.
  - aidos 13y ago
    It's definitely a shame to hear that has put you off. In any case, I'd recommend you do have a proper play with it - it's a lovely language. If you wanted to be safe you'd just start with 2 as it's easier to get help while learning the ecosystem. There's actually not much to learn / relearn when switching - the difficulty has been moving the dependencies to 3 (which is well underway now).

by Ixiaus 13y ago

Stubb 13y ago

The shocker for me was seeing that MySQL-python didn't support v3. And I recall all sorts of problems getting IPython 3 running in Emacs alongside the system version of Python 2. Porting a library to v3 was more than I was willing to bite off and a brand-new user when I had a customer deadline approaching.

nknighthb 13y ago
I haven't used MySQL-python in years. It's long bordered on being utterly unmaintained. Use oursql or pymysql.
Aqwis 13y ago
I was shocked by MySQL-python not supporting Python 3 as well, but then I discovered that there are several better alternatives to MySQL-python that do support it, such as pymysql. AFAIK it's 99% compatible with MySQL-python.

dded 13y ago

> This is unnecessarily pessimistic Remember, he's looking at using Python for the first time. I work in Perl-heavy environments, and I can assure you that the 2/3 split in Python is a reason that many will give for not using Python at all. It's very different among those who are already comfortable with Python. > Most of the major packages support Py3k and if they don't it's usually very simple to port over For you, maybe. He's just starting with Python. With regards to scientific Python, I took a peek at the install link on the Ipython site. It says that Ipython works with Python 2.6, 2.7, and >= 3.2. That was only mention I saw (in an admittedly casual look) for Python3. All the examples were in Python2.

AgentConundrum 13y ago
> the 2/3 split in Python is a reason that many will give for not using Python at all I don't know Python, but I've gone through a few phases where I'll play with it for a bit and then put it back down. (Incidentally, I appear to be entering a "play" phase right now.) I can't explain it exactly, but the 2/3 thing makes me really uneasy about learning the language. On one side, there is Python 2 which is supposed to die in the non-immediate future. I don't need to learn it, particularly since development isn't my primary career at the moment and I'm unlikely to "need" it before I inevitably switch careers back to dev. If I don't need it now, and I don't expect to be in a situation where I need it in the near future, why not go for Python 3 right away? On the other side, Python 3 is the new hotness, and it's the future of the language. It's the heir apparent. It's going to be "the" Python in the nearer-than-you-think future. But it doesn't seem ready. You get the impression that you'll start a greenfield project and then get to a point where you want to drop in a well-known component and you just won't be able to. You also look at the fact that it's been around for over half a decade yet 80% of of respondents to this survey say they use 2 more than 3, 40% have never touched it, and 20% say the whole thing was a bad idea. If you were walking into that environment, would you really be so quick to disregard it? I suppose the answer is to just learn it all and try to keep the differences in mind as you go, but it's understandable the a lot of people don't want to half to learn and semi-unlearn the same language all at once.
- aidos 13y ago
  It's definitely a shame to hear that has put you off. In any case, I'd recommend you do have a proper play with it - it's a lovely language. If you wanted to be safe you'd just start with 2 as it's easier to get help while learning the ecosystem. There's actually not much to learn / relearn when switching - the difficulty has been moving the dependencies to 3 (which is well underway now).