Comments on: Python 3000 officially released

By: MC screwdriver

MC screwdriver — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 20:49:44 +0000

jproach: In a few years, you wil HAVE to upgrade,
because 2.x will not be supported (or available) anymore. Then,
you have to modify your old code… Very
annoying.
bugloaf: if you want print(), maybe you should go back to C… Why was print acceptable up to now, and suddenly it is not? “Me thinks” someone
just far**d this one out when they fell on a
keyboard.

By: bugloaf

bugloaf — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:17:23 +0000

Hooray for purity! I’m glad they’re breaking backwards compatibility. If you want print statements go back to BASIC.

marco, what the hell are you talking about?

By: Marco

Marco — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:44:46 +0000

And still no way to enforce variable/function declarations? Come on, even perl has a strict pragma.

By: jproach

jproach — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:21:23 +0000

screwdriver: who exactly is forcing you to upgrade?

Also I’m sure you can find a way to automate this procedure.

By: MC screwdriver

MC screwdriver — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:56:35 +0000

Keep your hands off my print statements!
Now – all print statements have to be
changed to print()!?! Why? This is typically hundreds of lines in a program… What a waste of time, for no good reason whatsoever.

By: cas

cas — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:37:34 +0000

http://docs.python.org/dev/3.0/whatsnew/3.0.html#performance

10% slower than 2.5 according to that. when you take into account the major internal changes, performance was not the main objective of this release.

By: DerAxeman

DerAxeman — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:58:07 +0000

I heard that Python 3.0 was a lot slower too. That combined with loss of backward compatibility is a big black eye

By: chucklefromthecrowd

chucklefromthecrowd — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:26:19 +0000

Tom, have you tried OpenOffice?

Can we do emacs vs. nano next? (I’ll throw in for kwrite.)

By: Deggs

Deggs — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:13:48 +0000

backwards compatibility lead to what’s today known as microsoft.

have a look over at Apple’s stable if you want to talk about orphaned applications. MS isn’t even close to bad.

By: SneakyWho_am_i

SneakyWho_am_i — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:00:40 +0000

1) I agree wholeheartedly with Pascal, it’s great that we can break version compatibility between releases. (NB “We” is just “the community”, I am not involved with Python or anyone you know about).. Of course, Microsoft is compelled to keep it compatible to some extent so that we don’t cry and swtich to Linux or Mac – enough of our programs break for a new version of Windows as it is!

Python can break compatibility between releases because it is MORE AWESOME than Windows (and not an operating system)

2) I’m glad that it’s finally here!! Not that I write python (debug/hack/monkey patch maybe, actually write no) but it’s always seemed like a step forward and it’s great that they completed it!

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:00:01 +0000

“backwards compatibility lead to what’s today known as microsoft.”

Huh? Have you tried Office 2007?

By: joey

joey — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:50:24 +0000

Backward compatibilty isn’t an issue as more than one instance of python can exist at the same time.

I just makes the newer apps more performant that way.

By: pascal

pascal — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:19:31 +0000

“Py3k breaks backwards compatibility” — ah, I loves me some non-backwards compatible releases :D ’cause remember people, backwards compatibility lead to what’s today known as microsoft.