On 5/28/2014 3:49 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
Larry Martell <larry.mart...@gmail.com> writes:
Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether:

"Python 3 can revive Python" https://medium.com/p/2a7af4788b10

This makes the same false claim "It’s not like anyone is using Python 3 anyway, (so go ahead and bread existing Py3 code". At least some of the 20+ million windows downloads must be in use.

   long HN comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801834

One legitimate request is better installation of dependencies, which is in progress. This is not a 2 versus 3 issue, unless there are 3-only improvement.

Some want concurrency primitives like go has. Guido went for a new module instead. I don't know what the importand differences are.

Some want a better REPL, including color. The Idle shell already has the syntax colorizing. I don't know what else might have been meant.

"Python 3 is fine" http://sealedabstract.com/rants/python-3-is-fine/

In my opinion, about the best non-developer blog on Python 3 -- by a sensible, satisfied user. "in March 2014 Python 3 downloads overtook Python 2 downloads by a healthy margin 54% vs 46%." OK, that was boosted by the release of 3.4. But the point still stands.

Terry Jan Reedy


Reply via email to