Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #82384 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-12-12 08:32 +1100 |
| Last post | 2014-12-12 08:32 +1100 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-12-12 08:32 +1100
| From | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-12 08:32 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition |
| Message-ID | <mailman.16871.1418333546.18130.python-list@python.org> |
"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 top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web