GvR Europython keynote described on lwn.net
steve at pearwood.info
Sun Aug 2 10:04:53 CEST 2015
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 04:57 am, Rick Johnson wrote:
> On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 12:45:45 AM UTC-5, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > Yep, even the BDFL is actively developing in 2.7! He's no fool.
>> Of course not. Dropbox pay him to work on their systems,
>> and he wants to keep his job.
> Thanks for confirming my point that Python3 is not worth
> developing with for at least the next five years.
If Dropbox were using Python 1.5, would you conclude that Python 2 was not
worth developing in? I happen to know that at last year's US PyCon there
was at least one company still using Python 1.5. If it works for them, and
they don't need security updates, why not? But this doesn't mean others
should emulate them.
As Laura has explained, there is at least one sector of Python users that
not only doesn't want new features, but they don't want bug fixes either.
They would rather work around bugs themselves, and stability is more
important than correctness. If that works for them, great. But it doesn't
work for everyone.
Just because company X is using 2.7, why does that mean that *you* shouldn't
using 3.x? Surely you should make your own decision, based on your own
(For the record, Dropbox isn't using Python 2.7. They're using a heavily
customized private implementation of Python based on, but not the same as,
version 2.7. Whatever benefits they get from using that, I can promise that
*you* will not be getting them from the vanilla version of 2.7 available to
>> Are you aware that Dropbox are heavily pushing for static
>> type hints in Python 3 as a prerequisite for them porting
>> their masses of Python 2 code to Python 3?
> Well then, i hope they are ready to wait at least 10 years
> before adopting Python3, because it will take that long to
> work out all the kinks!
Nonsense. You can already download mypy and start using static type checking
in Python today.
> Of course, with the cloud service
> wars heating up, no one can be sure how long any of them
> will survive. Web technology is moving much faster than
>> That's one of the motives for the masses of effort put
>> into PEP 484, and its support PEPs, 482 and 483:
> I do find it flattering that many of my ideas regarding
> Python have been implemented: (1) It was me who recommended
> "optional type checking" way back around 2008
Don't flatter yourself. People have been suggesting type checking for Python
since Python 0.1.
> (Heck, you
> even agreed that it would be a good idea, but at the time, a
> moratorium was preventing new features) (2) The fresher look
> of Python.org is a result of my suggestions
So you're the one to blame for the horrible new design and the reliance on
design a triumph of style over substance, except that the new style is
worse than the old one.
> (3) The
> interactive online console was my idea to compete with the
> Ruby equivalent (4) I have pestered tutorial owners to
> upgrade their tutorials to py3 compatibility, and many did!
> (5) and last but not least, my courage to face down the
> trolls has given courage to the shadow lurkers, who now
> participate in open discussions on this list, and some have
> even moved over to more dangerous grounds like Python-ideas.
So you're the one to blame for all the bike-shedding from people who think
that copying design principles from PHP is a great idea?
Please stop "helping".
More information about the Python-list