4 ms·

Why did you edit in the implication that Python 3 is not applicable for people who have jobs and real life commitments to do things like running a company that

by pekk 11y ago

Why did you edit in the implication that Python 3 is not applicable for people who have jobs and real life commitments to do things like running a company that pays people? That is your opinion, not Guido's. Python 3 is already being used in companies and it's plenty good enough for that. Including library support. Dropbox using 2.7 is no different from Dropbox avoiding PyPy, they are evidently ultra-conservative (and probably have a lot of old code they don't want to port).

koenigdavidmj 11y ago
A rewrite (even a small one like moving from Python 2 to 3) costs dev and test time, and makes it difficult to do any other work simultaneously. It's not going to happen unless it has some value (perhaps, for example, they wanted to use the new builtin async syntax of Python 3.5 instead of rolling their own).
shadowmint 11y ago
That is my opinion, my Guido's. That's why it's not... In Quotes I'm not saying python 3 isn't suitable for production. I'm saying (and this is my opinion): If you have to use python 2, then do. If you can use python 3, then do. THIS is Guido's opinion: I would like you to switch... but I also recognize that it's difficult to switch, and it feels like a lot of hard work that you could also spend instead on say, improving the design of your website, or adding features to your application. ...at least, I have to assume so, because that's what he actually said at the keynote. So, take what you want from that, but don't accuse me of 'editing in' some implication. If you're happy using python 3; then be happy. ...but, if you shout at someone for using python 2, I think you're a douche, because there are real life reasons some people keep using python 2. ...and I. And..., clearly, Guido, acknowledge that. You don't have to. You can have your own opinion all you like... I honestly couldn't care less.

by pekk 11y ago

koenigdavidmj 11y ago

A rewrite (even a small one like moving from Python 2 to 3) costs dev and test time, and makes it difficult to do any other work simultaneously. It's not going to happen unless it has some value (perhaps, for example, they wanted to use the new builtin async syntax of Python 3.5 instead of rolling their own).

shadowmint 11y ago

That is my opinion, my Guido's. That's why it's not... In Quotes I'm not saying python 3 isn't suitable for production. I'm saying (and this is my opinion): If you have to use python 2, then do. If you can use python 3, then do. THIS is Guido's opinion: I would like you to switch... but I also recognize that it's difficult to switch, and it feels like a lot of hard work that you could also spend instead on say, improving the design of your website, or adding features to your application. ...at least, I have to assume so, because that's what he actually said at the keynote. So, take what you want from that, but don't accuse me of 'editing in' some implication. If you're happy using python 3; then be happy. ...but, if you shout at someone for using python 2, I think you're a douche, because there are real life reasons some people keep using python 2. ...and I. And..., clearly, Guido, acknowledge that. You don't have to. You can have your own opinion all you like... I honestly couldn't care less.