Python 3

Steven D'Aprano steven at REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au
Thu Nov 5 04:00:08 CET 2009


On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:27:09 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:

> Steven D'Aprano <steven at REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au> writes:
> 
>> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:08:54 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>> > Steven D'Aprano <steven at REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au> writes:
>> >> Why would I want to use an already existing library that is fast,
>> >> well- written and well-supported, when I can toss together a nasty
>> >> kludge myself?
>> > 
>> > Because using that library will ensure you can't migrate to Python 3
>> > any time soon?
>>
>> Why would I want to migrate to Python 3 any time soon?
> 
> Sounds like you've answered the questions posed, then. Good for you!

I was actually only being *half* tongue in cheek, which is why I left out 
the smiley.

On the python-dev list at the moment is a lot of discussion on why uptake 
of Python 3.1 has been slower than hoped. But one of the things that 
people haven't really discussed -- or at least that I haven't seen -- is 
why one would prefer 3.1 over 2.5 or 2.6.

I've played around with 3.0, and I've read the What's New for 3.1 (and am 
installing 3.1 now), and while the changes look nice, I'm not sure that 
they're nice enough to deal with the pain of 2to3 migration.

So how about that, 3.1 fans? What are the most compelling reasons for you 
that convinced you to change?


-- 
Steven



More information about the Python-list mailing list