Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 6:26 AM, Michael Torrie wrote: > On 01/16/2016 11:00 AM, William Ray Wing wrote: >> It was known at the time. It was certainly known by the companies >> that were ripped off, but they were typically small to really small >> and couldn’t get traction for

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 1/15/2016 10:09 AM, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:02 PM, William Ray Wing wrote: What Micro$oft was actually sued for was worse. They would approach a small company: “We like your product/technology, we think we are interested in buying you out, but we

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 15/01/16 18:55, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Alister wrote: Doublespace disk compression springs to mind Does not ring a bell, I was not even born for MS-DOS 6.0. it was exactly the scenario described A company had developed a

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: > Did people know this back then or it just surfaced years later? I > suppose that at the beginning MS was more "vulnerable" than it is > today. This was either pre- or early days of the Web which provided to

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Alister wrote: > it was exactly the scenario described > > A company had developed a means of impo=roving the Fat file system (IIRC by > using a pseudo file system on top to eliminate the wasted space caused by > incomplete blocks & the

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

> On Jan 16, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Bernardo Sulzbach > wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Alister wrote: >> it was exactly the scenario described >> >> A company had developed a means of impo=roving the Fat file system (IIRC by >>

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 01/16/2016 11:00 AM, William Ray Wing wrote: > It was known at the time. It was certainly known by the companies > that were ripped off, but they were typically small to really small > and couldn’t get traction for their stories in a press that was in > thrall to Microsoft. It was pretty much

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > > We would have to skip a few - 3.I and 3.O are too confusing, and 3.X > would wreak havoc with people's heads. But then, so would 3.A... > > Let's do this. Wreak the havoc. Unleash the folly. Dispel the sanity! > There

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 1/14/2016 3:55 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: But, when you have almost infinitely deep pockets, like Google, you don't need to create *everything* yourself, no, you simply wait for someone else to build it, then wait a little longer for them to market it successfully, and when it's jt

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

> On Jan 15, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Emile van Sebille wrote: > > On 1/14/2016 3:55 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: >> But, when you have almost infinitely deep pockets, like >> Google, you don't need to create *everything* yourself, no, >> you simply wait for someone else to build it, then

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:02 PM, William Ray Wing wrote: > > What Micro$oft was actually sued for was worse. They would approach a small > company: “We like your product/technology, we think we are interested in > buying you out, but we want to see your code to be sure it is >

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Robin Koch wrote: > > Not necessarily. > See TeX. :-) > GvR does not like even an elegant 3.10 and you are implying that we are going to converge to something? LOL. -- Bernardo Sulzbach --

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

Am 14.01.2016 um 01:40 schrieb Bernardo Sulzbach: On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: (...) 4.0 (assuming there is one) Isn't it just a matter of time? Do you think it is even possible not to have Python 4 eventually? Not necessarily. See TeX.

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

> On Jan 15, 2016, at 1:09 PM, Bernardo Sulzbach > wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:02 PM, William Ray Wing wrote: >> >> What Micro$oft was actually sued for was worse. They would approach a small >> company: “We like your product/technology, we

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 15/01/16 18:09, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:02 PM, William Ray Wing wrote: What Micro$oft was actually sued for was worse. They would approach a small company: “We like your product/technology, we think we are interested in buying you out, but we

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

In the end, wouldn't contemporary economies benefit from more "legislative fairness" when it comes to technology-focused businesses? -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Alister wrote: > > Doublespace disk compression springs to mind Does not ring a bell, I was not even born for MS-DOS 6.0. -- Bernardo Sulzbach -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 1/14/2016 3:55 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: And if the owners refuse to sell, no problem, you offer their customers the same services at bargain basement discounts But... that would require you to develop your own version, which is what you're trying to avoid! -- Greg --

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 15/01/2016 18:53, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: In the end, wouldn't contemporary economies benefit from more "legislative fairness" when it comes to technology-focused businesses? Maybe, but there is as much chance of that happening as Python 2.8 or RickedPython ever getting released, or the

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

Chris Angelico wrote: and 3.X would wreak havoc with people's heads. The danger there is that 3.X would sound so cool (everything is cooler with an X in it) that nobody would want to move past it. So after 3.X we would get 3.X.1, ... and then 3.X.X.1, ... At some point people would start

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 10:23:43 AM UTC-6, Emile van Sebille wrote: > Hmm, sounds like they're stealing plays from Micro$oft. "Stealing plays", hardly, they've stolen the *WHOLE* playbook! Corporations are like drug dealers: First they get you hooked on the free stuff, then they empty

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

> On Jan 15, 2016, at 10:09 AM, Bernardo Sulzbach > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:02 PM, William Ray Wing wrote: >> >> What Micro$oft was actually sued for was worse. They would approach a small >> company: “We like your product/technology,

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 2:49:49 PM UTC-6, Gregory Ewing wrote: > > On 1/14/2016 3:55 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > > > >> And if the owners refuse to sell, no problem, you offer > >> their customers the same services at bargain basement > >> discounts > > But... that would require you to

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 14:43:51 +0100 > Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote: >> > Or we'll be hit by a big rock from space. >> >> Sounds like a plan. > > Which one? Number 9? Hm, I didn't expect this question... plans[-1], most certainly. --

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 11:19:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Torrie wrote: > The only one speculating is you. Everything I've read points to this > idea of yours about GvR and Google being untrue. Providing speculation is not the same as providing facts. Please provide facts. And enumerate

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 11:46:30 PM UTC-6, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 1/13/2016 8:02 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > > and a leader who lost his cushy job at Google > > Unless you have access to facts that I do not, 'lost' is > impolite speculation. But lets move on. Well i admit my speculation

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:32:46 +0100 > Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote: >> >> > Or we'll be hit by a big rock from space. >> >> Sounds like a plan. >> > Which one? Number 9? >> >> Hm, I didn't expect this question... >> >> plans[-1], most certainly. > > Hmm. Am I

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Rick Johnson wrote: > (3) After Python3 came along, the Python community has > become fractured, and the Python code base has become > fractured, and the general public consensus is that Python > is on its way to extinction

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thursday 14 January 2016 14:29, Rick Johnson wrote: > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 9:08:40 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: >> You're talking about a very serious matter between two legal entities >> - if someone was *fired* because of social, technological, or other >> problems with

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Or we'll be hit by a big rock from space. Sounds like a plan. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 14:43:51 +0100 Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote: > > Or we'll be hit by a big rock from space. > > Sounds like a plan. Which one? Number 9? -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain Vybe Networks Inc. http://www.VybeNetworks.com/ IM:da...@vex.net VoIP: sip:da...@vybenetworks.com --

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 16:32:46 +0100 Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote: > >> > Or we'll be hit by a big rock from space. > >> Sounds like a plan. > > Which one? Number 9? > > Hm, I didn't expect this question... > > plans[-1], most certainly. Hmm. Am I being too subtle or...? from

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

Steven D'Aprano wrote: Maybe Guido will change his mind and we'll have 3.10. 3.11, 3.12, ... Who says that version numbers have to be base 10? After 3.9 we could have 3.A, 3.B, ... 3.Z, and then we have a long list of Unicode characters to work through before we're forced to bump the major

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 11:41:21 AM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: > Prove this. Find "general public consensus" that Python is > dead. And then, imitate rats and abandon this sinking > ship. I don't need to "imitate" anything, it has already begun. > I decided to give 3D modelling a go,

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> Maybe Guido will change his mind and we'll have 3.10. 3.11, 3.12, ... > > > Who says that version numbers have to be base 10? After > 3.9 we could have 3.A, 3.B, ... 3.Z, and then we

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Rick Johnson wrote: > So you're suggesting that GvR *WILLINGLY* left a global, and > well established giant, to work for a tiny start-up because > his bosses refused to switch from Python2 to (his new baby) > Pyhton3? > > So, let me

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 4:04:48 PM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Into the sin-bin you go for another three months. Enjoy your time in > the kill-file. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuDEP6eFkeA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-6, Ian wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Rick Johnson > > [...] > > > I wonder if he's considered the possibility that Google may > > swoop in an purchase Dropbox at some time in the near > > future, and he could find himself working for

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

I am confident that in a few years there will be sufficient new developments in language design that some degree of backward compatibility would be worth dropping in order to provide greater capabilities. If it needs to fork and become another language, that's OK. --

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 02:30 am, Rick Johnson wrote: > I represent Absolutely nobody except yourself. The entertainment value of your trolling has now dipped below the annoyance value. Into the sin-bin you go for another three months. Enjoy your time in the kill-file. -- Steven --

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 01/13/2016 08:29 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > Of course. But when you leave things open for speculation, > you enviably create a situation where rumors can start > circulating. GvR is not just any "John Doe" engineer, no, > he's the head of an open source community, and the community > has a right

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 1/13/2016 8:02 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: and a leader who lost his cushy job at Google Unless you have access to facts that I do not, 'lost' is impolite speculation. But lets move on. I have a contrary hypothesis based on the facts quoted below. As far as I know, Google is somewhat stuck

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 03:25 am, Random832 wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016, at 09:21, sjms...@gmail.com wrote: >> This strikes me as very good advice. Thanks for being so far-sighted. >> And let's hope that Python 4 has fewer incompatibilities (none would >> good) than Python 3! > > Who says there's

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

Steven D'Aprano wrote: Quote: if six.PY2: # Python 2 code elif six.PY3: # Python 3 code In this case, no code will get executed on Python 4 at all! Which is good, because if no code is executed, it can't exhibit any bugs. Everyone should write

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >> Quote: >> >> if six.PY2: >> # Python 2 code >> elif six.PY3: >> # Python 3 code >> >> In this case, no code will get executed on Python 4

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 6:11:06 PM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > But [GvR] has definitely ruled that 4.0 (assuming there is > one) will not be a major backwards-incompatible version > like 3.0 was. Well for the sake of Python's future, let's all hope so! I typically don't give much

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 14/01/2016 01:21, Chris Angelico wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:02 PM, BartC wrote: I was surprised recently by just how much incompatibility there was between Python 2 and 3. It wasn't just about print with parentheses and range instead of xrange. I wanted to try out a

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wednesday 13 January 2016 21:39:12 Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 12:02:59 +1100, Steven D'Aprano > > > declaimed the following: > >On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:40 am, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano > >>

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 9:08:40 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: > You're talking about a very serious matter between two legal entities > - if someone was *fired* because of social, technological, or other > problems with Python, that has implications that could matter in a > court of

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > (...) 4.0 (assuming there is one) Isn't it just a matter of time? Do you think it is even possible not to have Python 4 eventually? -- Bernardo Sulzbach -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 1/13/2016 7:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 03:25 am, Random832 wrote: On Wed, Jan 13, 2016, at 09:21, sjms...@gmail.com wrote: This strikes me as very good advice. Thanks for being so far-sighted. And let's hope that Python 4 has fewer incompatibilities (none would

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 13/01/2016 07:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote: Quote: With the end of support for Python 2 on the horizon (in 2020), many package developers have made their packages compatible with both Python 2 and Python 3 by using constructs such as: if sys.version_info[0] == 2:

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 8:11:40 PM UTC-6, Michael Torrie wrote: >> Hmm, so Guido moved to Dropbox because Google fired him? >> [...] I can find zero evidence to support your assertion, > > Feel free to

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:40 am, Bernardo Sulzbach wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> (...) 4.0 (assuming there is one) > > Isn't it just a matter of time? Do you think it is even possible not > to have Python 4 eventually? 3.9 is probably

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 01/13/2016 06:02 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Or we're too busy dealing with rising sea levels, crop failures, antibiotic > resistant diseases, chaotic mass migrations, terrorists, wars for control > over resources like water, and the collapse of the corporate state to care > about such little

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > In fact, in the years before Python3 arrived, it had enjoyed > a steady ascension from obscurity into mainstream hacker > culture, but now, all that remains is a fractured community, > a fractured code base, and

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On 01/13/2016 06:02 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > In fact, in the years before Python3 arrived, it had enjoyed > a steady ascension from obscurity into mainstream hacker > culture, but now, all that remains is a fractured community, > a fractured code base, and a leader who lost his cushy job > at

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:02 PM, BartC wrote: > I was surprised recently by just how much incompatibility there was between > Python 2 and 3. It wasn't just about print with parentheses and range > instead of xrange. > > I wanted to try out a jpeg decoder with PyPy and the three

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 8:11:40 PM UTC-6, Michael Torrie wrote: > Hmm, so Guido moved to Dropbox because Google fired him? > [...] I can find zero evidence to support your assertion, Feel free to post evidence that will *DISPROVE* my statement. > Dishonesty is a harsh accusation, but

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

This strikes me as very good advice. Thanks for being so far-sighted. And let's hope that Python 4 has fewer incompatibilities (none would good) than Python 3! Cheers, Steve J. Martin -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016, at 09:21, sjms...@gmail.com wrote: > This strikes me as very good advice. Thanks for being so far-sighted. > And let's hope that Python 4 has fewer incompatibilities (none would > good) than Python 3! Who says there's going to be a Python 4? I always assumed 3.9 would be

Re: Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Random832 wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016, at 09:21, sjms...@gmail.com wrote: >> This strikes me as very good advice. Thanks for being so far-sighted. >> And let's hope that Python 4 has fewer incompatibilities (none would >> good) than

Stop writing Python 4 incompatible code

/01/12/stop-writing-python-4- incompatible-code/ or http://tinyurl.com/jskt54s Better still, don't do version checks *at all*. There is almost never any need for a version check. Better is to use feature detection: try: xrange # Succeeds in Python 2. except NameError: xrange = range