also honestly it seems a little obnoxious to drop "hey this didn't go so well" eight years in, like it hadn't occurred to anyone
-
-
and then cite docs unchanged since 3.0 and one of the most easily-ported features
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
-
I was mostly responding to "30% is awesome!" in your rebuttal to Zed, which feels pretty wrong to me.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Also, everybody who paid attention knew the 2->3 thing was planned to take years.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ubernostrum @eevee
this is pretty misleading. Here's a post from 2011 making the same point. http://sayspy.blogspot.com/2011/01/my-semi-regular-reminder-that-python-3.html …pic.twitter.com/vLyfqf2Qne
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
2009 + 5 = 2014. We're now at the end of 2016.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
And the major libraries/frameworks basically got there by 2014 or earlier.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
You seem to interpret as by 2014 nobody supports Py2 anymore. I interpret as people support Py3 by then.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Red Hat is going to support Py2 for old RHEL customers so long they may have to solve y2k38. Should that count against?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
certainly not, but still wondering about #!/usr/bin/env python. Can scripts assume py3? How do you write one script?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.