[omaha] Which version of Python?

Chad Homan choman at gmail.com
Fri Jul 31 20:06:10 CEST 2009

I agree as well.  python 2.x (specifically 2.6.2) is well established.
I am working with 2.4, 2.6.2, and 3.1.  Hopefully I won't muddy the water
much, but here are some things to consider.

Even though python 3.1+ is the future, you will run into backwards
issues in general.  If you require with 3rd party modules, they may not be
up to
speed with 3.1 yet, etc.  And you definitely should not code in 3.1 if your
are to eventually execute on 2.6.  This will not work well for anyone

Also note that there are forward compatibility issues as well. Some APIs are

obsolete or have changed names.  A few examples are:

Python 2.X

   - print "hello"
   - import ConfigParser
   - API's: file and open are the same

Python 3.1+

   - print ("hello")
   - import configparser
   - API file is obsolete, use open

The only caveat to this is if you're now producing anything for real-world
use and
you are just learning.  3.1 may still be a better place to start because it
is the
future and if you're just starting why not learn how things are done in what
is coming.

In the end it's your decision, so choose the blue or red pill wisely.
sorry could not resist the matrix spin

Anyways, good luck


Pablo Picasso<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/pablo_picasso.html>
- "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Charles Kaminski <
ckaminski at datascoutinc.com> wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> I agree with you that those decisions should be shaped by the tools and
> support around you.
> >From my own experiences I can tell you that Python 2.5 has a number of
> mature tools surrounding it to get you developing on it quickly.
>   1. Most of the development out there currently supports 2.5.
>   2. There's a great O'Reilly book by Mark Lutz for 2.5 called "Learning
>   Python" that I highly recommend. The book assumes very little of the
> reader.
>    Compared to other technical books, it's quite easy to follow.  My
>   only criticism of the book (and it's a small one) is that its explanation
> of
>   Python's behind-the-scene use of pointers and why you should care about
> this
>   could be clearer.  The fourth addition for 3.0 isn't scheduled until
>   September.
>   3. Finally, WingWare's professional IDE is solid and supports 2.5 (up to
>   2.6).  The Prof version has an interactive debugger which greatly speeds
> up
>   debugging (and learning if you're new trying to figure out something you
>   don't understand), a source assistant that will tell you what each
>   documented function does and the expected inputs as you code, and code
>   completion.  Those items alone will get you coding much faster.  I don't
>   like their free version as it doesn't support these items.  Their
>   professional version comes with a fully functional free trial that can be
>   extended a number of times.  They have a number of videos and tutorials
> for
>   specific frameworks and to help you get started with the basics.
> Python development generally move fast, so I'm sure 3.0 will enjoy the same
> soon.  Hope this helps.
> Charles
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Steve Young <
> sy at foreignlanguageflashcards.com> wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I read through A Byte of Python for Version 3, then realized that most of
> > the frameworks and existing programming are using v2.x.  I am thinking
> that
> > I should study and begin using v2 first, and then move to v3 later when
> it
> > becomes necessary.  If you have any suggestions please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Steve
> > _______________________________________________
> > Omaha Python Users Group mailing list
> > Omaha at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/omaha
> > http://www.OmahaPython.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Omaha Python Users Group mailing list
> Omaha at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/omaha
> http://www.OmahaPython.org

More information about the Omaha mailing list