3 ms·
I really don't mind these apparent (small) improvements to Python. However, the fact that Python 3 just went off and did it's own things rather than the usual
by andy_ppp 12y ago
I really don't mind these apparent (small) improvements to Python.
However, the fact that Python 3 just went off and did it's own things rather than the usual cycle of:
1) improve a language feature
2) deprecate the old way of doing it
3) give people time to update code (usually a couple of point releases)
4) remove features that have been replaced
Python 3 should not have dropped lots of little changes with no backwards compatibility. They should still make 2.8 and 2.9 that are releases that remove features and add new ones until most python code works in Python 3.
- toyg 12y agoSomebody should write a HN plugin that does something like this: if is_about_python3(post): insert_token_random_complaint_from_2008() (edit: snake-case)
- andy_ppp 12y agoCan _someone_ write a filter for snarky unconstructive comments while they are at it?
- toyg 12y agoJust make sure not to filter tedious unconstructive 7-year-old lists of grievances. We can't live without those.
- andy_ppp 12y agoI really don't see what I said wasn't true, Debian still won't escape Python 2 for many years for example. Are you saying the move to Python 3 was smooth and a resounding success or are you just pretending that it's done and no one is still using Python 2.x? Sorry my comment has annoyed you so much but you really haven't made constructive points to disprove it.
- kasabali 12y agothey've already done it: improve a language feature & deprecate the old way of doing it -> Python 2.6+ and 3.2+ remove features that have been replaced -> 3.x Did I also mention it is not hard to have a single code base that is compatible with both 2.x and 3.x?