Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! - Printable Version +- Python Forum (https://python-forum.io) +-- Forum: General (https://python-forum.io/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: News and Discussions (https://python-forum.io/forum-31.html) +--- Thread: Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! (/thread-4366.html) |
Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! - xuancong - Aug-11-2017 As an experienced developer in Python 2 & 3, I would like to give Python developer team some significant comments. It is understood that we all want to make Python better, more efficient and more robust to handle the ever growing algorithmic complexities in real life. Thus, for every change you are going to make to the language, I hope you could think over it very carefully. I also understand that different people have different ideas and opinions, sometimes they don't agree with each other, but then you should try to think of how to make a compromise w.r.t the majority, instead of just changing it at your own will. Regarding the differences between Python 2 & 3, Sebastian Raschka (sebastianraschka.com/Articles/2014_python_2_3_key_diff.html) has given a very comprehensive and in-depth comparison. And I will base my comments on that list of differences:
In general, if you had been cautious enough in making compromises and considerations, I do not think that migrating from Python2 to Python3 should incur that many incompatibilities as what is happening now. To make a programming language better, you developers should be more cohesive and considerate in solving key issues (such as execution speed, multi-core multi-threading (GIL)) rather than enforcing your own preferential style and introduce numerous incompatibilities, and then old codes cannot run, and then efforts are needed to convert old codes into the new format. I do appreciate your efforts in adding new operators such as matrix multiplication '@', but those can be easily added on top of Python2 as well. At last, I hope the developers can be more coherent in improving Python, only so can we together make Python better! RE: Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! - metulburr - Aug-11-2017 python2.x is soon to be dead. They already extended support from 2015 to 2020. But i doubt they are going to do it again. There are no more features since 2015, just bug fixes. Almost all main 3rd party libraries support 3.x. The fact that 2020 is the aimed year of death for python2.x you should switch to 3.x now, not wait until 2020. The time has passed to move to 3.x. https://pythonclock.org/ Quote:such as execution speedI never really have a problem with speed in python. All the times i have seen others have issues, it is in their coding, in which would occur in any language, including C/C++ if they coded it that way. And then they blame the bottleneck issue on python. RE: Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! - nilamo - Aug-11-2017 I'm confused, what point are you trying to get across? Python3 wasn't just a few personal preferences, and it wasn't hastily done. It was under development for years, until it represented the language GvR wanted. And if your goal is for developers of the language itself (instead of consumers of that language) to consider undoing the changes from python3, that ... a) isn't going to happen (it was released 9 years ago, after all), and b) they don't even view this forum, so they won't see it anyway. RE: Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! - ichabod801 - Aug-11-2017 These are the same old tired complaints we've been hearing for years. Python 3.x is here, deal with it. It's not a big or even medium problem unless you have a huge code base in 2.x. And if you do have a huge code base in 2.x, you've had nine years to upgrade it. RE: Python 2 vs Python 3, developers should be more coherent!!! - DeaD_EyE - Aug-12-2017 Many of the decisions in Python 3 improved the language much and remove old wrong decisions. For example the use of iterators and the change of the range function was a good step. You should read the Zen of Python . Explicit is better than implicit. It fits perfectly together with generators. A pure function should never define which data type it returns. You define outside of the function which datatype you need. When I need an set for an operation, why should I return in the first place a list when I need a set.Also the Unicode support is good, when you understand the difference between bytes and strings. In Python 2 Unicode was a huge mess. There happened also much implicit encoding and decoding. You can't do this mistake in Python 3. |