41–50 of 62 posts
I’m of the opinion that one should only maintain python2 projects not actively develop and expand them. If your project needed http2 then it should be ported to python3. Edit: would using python3 in a container make sense where the distribution only ships legacy python?
I’m of the opinion that one should only maintain python2 projects not actively develop and expand them. If your project needed http2 then it should be ported to python3. Edit: would using python3 in a container make sense where the distribution only ships legacy python?
The current version of Redhat - RHEL 7 - which most banks, large enterprises etc. are using comes with a system python version of 2.7.5 and you need to jump through hoops to install Python 3.x ( e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8087184/problems-install... ), which may not even be possible if you're in an environment where security is tightly controlled. There is the possibility of Python 3.x being default in…
What? You can install Python 3.6 from EPEL[1], takes 5 seconds.
I’m of the opinion that one should only maintain python2 projects not actively develop and expand them. If your project needed http2 then it should be ported to python3. Edit: would using python3 in a container make sense where the distribution only ships legacy python?
What if a company has a large codebase that's in Python 2 and wants http2? Will those suggesting porting help them bear the costs and manhours it takes? (Google, for one, still uses 2. As does Dropbox. And both companies had Guido Van Rossum working for them at some point).
This is why banks still use COBOL and Fortran.
I’m of the opinion that one should only maintain python2 projects not actively develop and expand them. If your project needed http2 then it should be ported to python3. Edit: would using python3 in a container make sense where the distribution only ships legacy python?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, Python 3 already has a similar library that deals with this stuff, such as https://github.com/decentfox/aioh2 . Also, this is mostly intended for Tornado backends, offering compatibility with Tornado's request / response objects.
Are people really still so closely wedded to Python 2 that they find it easier to reimplement all the features they need from Python 3 in the former, instead of switching to the latter?
I had a coworker who was against moving to python3(and kept on writing python2 code for a while) because you need to use brackets with python3 print statement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if a company has a large codebase that's in Python 2 and wants http2? Will those suggesting porting help them bear the costs and manhours it takes? (Google, for one, still uses 2. As does Dropbox. And both companies had Guido Van Rossum working for them at some point).
> What if a company has a large codebase that's in Python 2 and wants http2? Will those suggesting porting help them bear the costs and manhours it takes? This is why banks still use COBOL and Fortran.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unjustifiable assertion. - they could continue to maintain python2 - they could move to a non-python platform - they could go out of business - they could hold out for Python4 (Python3 was only 8 years after Python2) ...
GVR has already said that Python 4 (if it's even ever called that) will not have the same kind of breaking changes 3 did.
But if an individual or organization does not find the python 3 updates and ecosystem a compelling upgrade over 2, “don’t update until the next big change” is definitely one option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The current version of Redhat - RHEL 7 - which most banks, large enterprises etc. are using comes with a system python version of 2.7.5 and you need to jump through hoops to install Python 3.x ( e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8087184/problems-install... ), which may not even be possible if you're in an environment where security is tightly controlled. There is the possibility of Python 3.x being default in…
>you need to jump through hoops to install Python 3.x What? You can install Python 3.6 from EPEL[1], takes 5 seconds. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, Python 3 already has a similar library that deals with this stuff, such as https://github.com/decentfox/aioh2 . Also, this is mostly intended for Tornado backends, offering compatibility with Tornado's request / response objects.
Are people really still so closely wedded to Python 2 that they find it easier to reimplement all the features they need from Python 3 in the former, instead of switching to the latter?
What's simpler, rewriting a massive project, or maintaining a library? For example, OP did the latter himself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GVR has already said that Python 4 (if it's even ever called that) will not have the same kind of breaking changes 3 did.
And 3 had different changes than 2 ( https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/2.0.html ) though it is interesting that Unicode support was a big feature in both, and that many people still find Python3’s Unicode support problematic (e.g., http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2014/5/12/everything-about-unicode/ ) But if an individual or organization does not find the python 3 updates and ecosystem a compelling upgrade over 2, “don’t upd…