4 ms·
That's a problem that needs to be addressed by hiring a full-time maintainer for all legacy code. For example, Clark University has an endowment of $355 Million
by akshatpradhan 12y ago
That's a problem that needs to be addressed by hiring a full-time maintainer for all legacy code. For example, Clark University has an endowment of $355 Million. That's three times the size a company like Veracode. Why are universities unable to hire maintainers for all this legacy code and bring this legacy code up-to-date with current standards and best practices?
- hobarrera 12y agoBecause it's really really hard to justify. My dad is a chemist, and I recently learnt that some Fortran code he wrote in the nineties is till being used in academia. Try to explain to his colleagues that you need an on-site engineer to maintain python code just a decade old. Anyhow, while I disagree with the need of a dedicated engineer to port code to python3, porting isn't much of a big deal. If your dependencies work (eg: your libraries are python3-compatible), most of you work is done by 2to3. Very little effort is needed after that. The problem up to now, has been waiting for you dependencies/libraries to achieve python3-compatibility (recursively, of course). But we've already moved past that.
- bayesianhorse 12y agoThere's no reason why you can't use "closed" Python 2 code, or even Fortran for that matter, from Python 3. It's just a matter of interfacing. I highly doubt that "End of life" means you can't get it to run anymore.