On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:14:02 +0900 "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
had my experience would have been different. It's bad enough to have to tell people "Python 3 is currently lacking some critical libraries, particularly third-party libraries" without also telling them (wrongly IMO) "oh, and it's a new language too".
That's why I propose the C to C++ analogy.
I think it's an unfortunate analogy. C++ needs new libraries (with brand new APIs) to take advantage of its abstraction capabilities. Python 3 has almost the same abstraction capabilities as Python 2, you don't need to write new libraries: just port the existing ones.
True, C++ does introduce a lot of new features, but most programmers migrating from C to C++ don't learn to use them properly for years, if ever, I'm told.
I don't see how Python 3 has that problem. You can be productive here and now in Python 3, re-using your knowledge of Python 2 with a bit of added information. Regards Antoine.