3 ms·
In my experience, the lack of support by common libraries is not nearly as bad as the author claims: http://python3wos.appspot.com/ http://python3wos.appspot.c
by akerl_ 12y ago
In my experience, the lack of support by common libraries is not nearly as bad as the author claims:
http://python3wos.appspot.com/ http://python3wos.appspot.com/
- the_mitsuhiko 12y agoAll my libraries run on Python 3 but I would recommend nobody to use them on that Python version if they can also use them on 2.x. They have better unicode support on 2.x and there are more 2.x users thus less bugs in 2.x specific code. Aside from that, the ecosystem for other libraries is bigger.
- akerl_ 12y agoThe point you raise regarding the impact userbase-size has on the library is very important in the Python2/3 split. It's similar to the divide that multi-architecture releases have to deal with, where less common platforms are more likely to have long-lived bugs just because the userbase is smaller and less likely to find and identify them. If, as the author of an impressive collection of Python libraries, you had to make a rough estimate of when your Python 3 userbase will reach critical mass, such that they have a reasonable shot at finding those bugs and getting them fixed, how far into the future do you think we're looking?
- the_mitsuhiko 12y agoLast time I was looking less than 5% of my users which was two months ago (up from 3% two years ago or so) used Python 3 at least going by download stats. But Python 3 support takes way more than 50% of my time :-/
- coldtea 12y agoYes, but that's you, and you are a known anti-P3 (at least as far as string handling goes) type :-) What do other devs that ported their stuff to P3 say?