Is 3.0 worth breaking backward compatibility?

Andreas Waldenburger geekmail at
Sun Dec 7 20:35:53 CET 2008

On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 11:22:23 -0800 (PST) walterbyrd
<walterbyrd at> wrote:

> IMO: breaking backward compatibility is a big deal, and should only be
> done when it is seriously needed.
Pleeeeze. Python 3 is shipping now, and so is 2.x, where x > 5. Python
2 is going to be around for quite some time. What is everybody's

> Also, IMO, most of, if not all, of the changes being made in 3.0 are
> debatable, at best. I can not think of anything that is being changed
> that was really a "show stopper" anyway.
Right. But warts accumulate, and some day you'll have a troglodyte
of a language. Better to scrubb off some warts every now and then, so
the whole thing remains agile.

> At best, I am a casual python user, so it's likely that I am missing
> something.
Yes, the big picture.

Also, being a casual Python user (like myself, just to clarify), *you*
will least be bitten by the incombatibilties.

I *really* don't get all the outrage. It's a major new version. What
better time to tighten things up a bit?


My real email address is constructed by swapping the domain with the
recipient (local part).

More information about the Python-list mailing list