Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #70381

Re: Why Python 3?

Show all headers | View raw

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 19/04/14 05:49, Andrew Berg wrote:
> On 2014.04.18 22:28, Anthony Papillion wrote:
>> What is the general feel of /this/ community? I'm about to start
>> a large scale Python project. Should it be done in 2 or 3? What
>> are the benefits, aside from the 'it's the future' argument?
> Python 3 is not the future; it is the present. If you're developing
> an application, just use Python 3.4 and don't look back unless you 
> absolutely positively *need* one of the big libraries that doesn't
> fully support Python 3 yet. The smaller ones either support it or
> have been replaced, and the few remaining (e.g., Twisted, Django)
> are getting there.

Django has been there since 1.5. My company has been using python3 in
production since 1.6 was released. There have been a few other third
party libraries we've wanted to use but can't, but we've been able to
work around that.

Regards,
Ian F

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTUnMOAAoJEODsV4MF7PWzhEsH/infLqjUcGh+vSTaMNEvjuRn
/vqaxiok5/9opocoDtBbK707rpJz55V+NP1ajhso0llhLlQ1T7XyAK2QQthfvcTd
FIyn7uw7ud5nofivXUkkO3g9FoHRASZnAc9mXZGGV7O1RKjA3YvEccOakJKpq/jC
UYzBYLOfkUzLYV9yQPaE5Dxt/rRmO1NLNzdBMXXTBOy4s6hd+B+TSCCgAgGy05ZJ
yNePgO98N2wq7W/iG4EAw409rxXYxR0cAHNSID7+m1omSTPls4PV+jyIfmoS+eBl
6nWkqjVw3yw2cF0gBs1k/sjxPZ/aXOjD1FxpIhBOvh+upNieFSP0AT2X5R3NRnw=
=wW3W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Why Python 3? Ian Foote <ian@feete.org> - 2014-04-19 13:58 +0100

csiph-web