Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.mixmin.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.031 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.94; '*S*': 0.00; '16,': 0.03; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'context': 0.07; 'feature.': 0.09; 'fixed,': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; 'bug': 0.12; 'accepting': 0.14; '>on': 0.16; 'paradigms': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'library': 0.18; 'stack': 0.19; 'version.': 0.19; 'programming': 0.22; 'email addr:gmail.com>': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; "aren't": 0.24; 'evolving': 0.24; "shouldn't": 0.24; 'mon,': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.24; 'sort': 0.25; 'developers': 0.25; '>': 0.26; 'define': 0.26; 'push': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'am,': 0.29; 'words': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'needed.': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'url:mailman': 0.30; 'software,': 0.31; 'towards': 0.31; '-0700,': 0.31; 'fixing': 0.31; 'libraries': 0.31; 'though.': 0.31; 'way?': 0.31; 'anyone': 0.31; 'probably': 0.32; 'url:python': 0.33; 'becomes': 0.33; 'bugs': 0.33; 'older': 0.33; 'sense': 0.34; 'subject:the': 0.34; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'much.': 0.36; 'url:listinfo': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'effort': 0.37; 'being': 0.38; 'skip:& 10': 0.38; 'little': 0.38; 'anything': 0.39; 'moving': 0.39; 'url:mail': 0.40; 'how': 0.40; 'easy': 0.60; 'eventually': 0.60; 'solve': 0.60; 'warm': 0.60; 'full': 0.61; 'new': 0.61; 'john': 0.61; 'times': 0.62; 'email addr:gmail.com': 0.63; 'different': 0.65; 'skip:+ 10': 0.65; 'to:addr:gmail.com': 0.65; 'believe': 0.68; 'mar': 0.68; 'production': 0.68; 'prime': 0.74; '1:00': 0.84; '2015': 0.84; '2015.': 0.91; 'discovering': 0.91; 'constitute': 0.93 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=y0dTzjyKdws3KtpCYOtPgd8OLrPHTHX8n9dMP3iFSPw=; b=x7ePYnsKZ1TXSBm1E4G5eN9sKqJcIf1qbMEj3atXyzbUgQPv8OBgl7Bzw5jvgwnZfZ yCGwNPjiwvYrt/KqEc5vWoPDZab3pG776EhZwZhtemWKUi0dptaiRFiqsAzaZw1cEGwW xOWXaVlqG+SGOzkIQN5fWg9c0WsQ8towhoGg77sJLRPHiTGAZwPqr0udf3SqCT4czuQA hsYa65RkcuR/w/czU+KsoA/+VK97dzQgR5dy6gVa17Qa4BA+MjkqoWQSuyyHuZaXg0x1 himhE7P2NPC9b8A35vfvq/+gf5IcUDbfH2QKvkXsg+izjZSX6PMoZKamsGv6PX7xY3K5 w5gA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.51.102 with SMTP id j6mr44930423oeo.34.1426462518351; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 16:35:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <550351BF.5020108@animats.com> <87vbi4ovp1.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 05:05:18 +0530 Subject: Re: Python 2 to 3 conversion - embrace the pain From: Kishan Thobhani To: Mario Figueiredo Cc: python-list@python.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c30a68b11f6705115c2fb7 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 09:25:47 +0100 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.19 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 114 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1426494348 news.xs4all.nl 2961 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:55386 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:87528 --001a11c30a68b11f6705115c2fb7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I believe we push towards accepting new paradigms like python 3. If bugs were found on libraries used in older context were probably because there wasn't a need of particular feature. & that is how eventually a software becomes a legacy. There are times when we might want to re-use this library or legacy software, then it make sense to solve the bug as well as port it to new version. Timeline for anything build on top-of-any-language doesn't necessarily have to cope up with evolving language unless needed. Warm Regards, Kishan Thobhani Jedi Master at Printajoy | Full Stack Engineer at Azoi Inc. W: www.kishanthobhani.com E: thobhanikishan@gmail.com M: +91-972-594-0782 On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Mario Figueiredo wrote: > On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:05:21 -0700, John Nagle > wrote: > > >On 3/14/2015 1:00 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > > > > Some of the bugs I listed are so easy to hit that I suspect those > >packages aren't used much. Those bugs should have been found years > >ago. Fixed, even. I shouldn't be discovering them in 2015. > > > > I appreciate all the effort put in by developers in fixing these > >problems. Python 3 is still a long way from being ready for prime > >time, though. > > > > What do you mean a long way? Is this a scaremongering tactic? Some > little FUD to poison the minds of anyone thinking moving to Python 3? > Or you just chose your words poorly? > > Because 3rd-party packages don't define whether the language is ready > for production or not and the bugs you found on the standard library > shouldn't be much different from other bugs found onPython 2 during > Python 2 prime time. > > What makes you think your anedoctal bugs constitute any sort of > evidence this programming language isn't ready to be used by the > public? > > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > --001a11c30a68b11f6705115c2fb7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I believe we push towards accepting new paradigms like pyt= hon 3. If bugs were found on libraries used in older context were probably = because there wasn't a need of particular feature. & that is how ev= entually a software becomes a legacy. There are times when we might want to= re-use this library or legacy software, then it make sense to solve the bu= g as well as port it to new version. Timeline for anything build on top-of-= any-language doesn't necessarily have to cope up with evolving language= unless needed. =C2=A0

Warm Regards,

Kishan Thobhani=C2=A0
Jedi Master a= t Printajoy | Full Stack Engineer at Azoi Inc.

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Mario Figue= iredo <marfig@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:05:21 -0700, John Nagle <nagle@animats.com>
wrote:

>On 3/14/2015 1:00 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Some of the bugs I listed are so easy to hit that I suspe= ct those
>packages aren't used much.=C2=A0 Those bugs should have been found = years
>ago.=C2=A0 Fixed, even.=C2=A0 I shouldn't be discovering them in 20= 15.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I appreciate all the effort put in by developers in fixin= g these
>problems.=C2=A0 Python 3 is still a long way from being ready for prime=
>time, though.
>

What do you mean a long way? Is this a scaremongering tactic? Some
little FUD to poison the minds of anyone thinking moving to Python 3?
Or you just chose your words poorly?

Because 3rd-party packages don't define whether the language is ready for production or not and the bugs you found on the standard library
shouldn't be much different from other bugs found onPython 2 during
Python 2 prime time.

What makes you think your anedoctal bugs constitute any sort of
evidence this programming language isn't ready to be used by the
public?

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

--001a11c30a68b11f6705115c2fb7--