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


Groups > comp.lang.python > #82384

Re: Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition

From Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au>
Subject Re: Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition
Date 2014-12-12 08:32 +1100
References <CAMA3c488xXJFVrO8Qt82A-oAQ3AAoavB956eYTNsd6TXO5g8hQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFYqXL-PqQ2qzs3G2CZG5TKvOXr0DjnHsWoJ4T3jD24cMjrsyg@mail.gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.16871.1418333546.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw


"Giampaolo Rodola'" <g.rodola@gmail.com> writes:

> I still think the only *real* obstacle remains the lack of important
> packages such as twisted, gevent and pika which haven't been ported
> yet.

What disqualifies other obstacles from being “*real* obstacles”? How do
you determine that?

> With those ones ported switching to Python 3 *right now* is not only
> possible and relatively easy, but also convenient.

If my program relies on an obscure library ‘foo’, and that library is
not ported to Python 3, switching to Python 3 is not feasible, and
certainly not convenient — regardless of the status of “important
packages such as twisted, gevent, and pika”.

So your assertion here is plainly false.

What is it you're actually wanting to say?

-- 
 \        “Some people, when confronted with a problem, think ‘I know, |
  `\       I'll use regular expressions’. Now they have two problems.” |
_o__)                           —Jamie Zawinski, in alt.religion.emacs |
Ben Finney

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


Thread

Re: Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-12-12 08:32 +1100

csiph-web