Using Python 2

[Terry Reedy]

On 9/8/2017 6:12 AM, Leam Hall wrote:

> I've read comments about Python 3 moving from the Zen of Python.

Comments about Python 3 range from factual to opinionated to fake.

> I'm a "plain and simple" person myself.

Many of the changes in Python3 were simplifications -- removing a 
semi-deprecated 'old way' in favor of a new way that was already in 
Python 2 and widely used.  A major example was dropping old-style 
classes.  This had little impact because by 2.6, people were mostly 
using new-style classes or were mostly using old-style classes in a way 
compatible with new-style classes.

> Complexity to support what CompSci folks want,

I was part of the Python 3 design discussions.  I don't remember ever 
hearing anything like "we should do it this more complex way because 
that is what CompSci folks want".

> which was used to describe some of the Python 3 changes, 

I presume by people trying to persuade you to avoid Python 3. That does 
not make it true.  This claim is nonsensical in that 3.0 introduced very 
little that was new.  Unicode was added in 2.0, a decade before.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy