Python 3 is worth it not for asyncio and unicode (though these are very good reasons if you care about them). It's worth it due to 21st century exception handling, which breaks down in Python 2 in a spectacular fashion the moment you raise in your except: clauses.
Python 3 in 2016
11–20 of 194 posts
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#12Been thinking about learning to code, and a lot of people have recommended Python as a good language to begin with. Taking a look at this, should I be looking elsewhere?
Python is an excellent language to begin with, you're reading this article wrong if it puts you off Python. There is drama around Python 2 or Python 3, but the answer is clear. Use Python 3 for new projects, use Python 2 when you have to (legacy projects).
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#13Python 3 is worth it not for asyncio and unicode (though these are very good reasons if you care about them). It's worth it due to 21st century exception handling, which breaks down in Python 2 in a spectacular fashion the moment you raise in your except: clauses.
Ah yeah the small nice things. `raise from`, `__traceback__` on all raised exceptions (instead of dicking with `sys.exc_info`), `nonlocal`, `super` …
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#14Since everyone gives anecdotal proofs that Python 3 is just fine, I'll give mine as well. I've migrated to Python3 a rather big project (for the unicode handling) and although it was not quite easy, it'just fine now. I'm active in Qt, web, json, sql domains and I've never needed a library that is Python 2 only. Thus from my own point of view, the Python 3 ecosystem is just complete now. Super.
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#15We are using Python LDAP library[1] at work, but it is not available for Python 3 yet. Is there an alternative?
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#16We've been using Python 3 since we implemented a new service architecture and it's been an easy transition for our 50+ engineers.
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#17We are using Python LDAP library[1] at work, but it is not available for Python 3 yet. Is there an alternative? 1 https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-ldap/
Yes!
RedHat needed it too and forked the project: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pyldap
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#18[deleted]
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#19Since it's basically all anecdotal, I'll say my gazing-into-the-crystal-ball educated-guess feeling that Python 4 will make the entirety of Python about as popular as Perl is today if: it doesn't get rid of GIL and at the same time implement a JIT compiler, and at the same time remain 100% .py source-code compatible with Python 3.
The developers have dug themselves into this mess with frivolous differences ("print" a function, wanting to remove the "%" string operator, etc.), instead of spending the years on more productive features, now is the chance to dig themselves out again.
It's a beautiful language, too bad the development choices were a bit sketchy.
Re: Python 3 in 2016
#20Since everyone gives anecdotal proofs that Python 3 is just fine, I'll give mine as well. I've migrated to Python3 a rather big project (for the unicode handling) and although it was not quite easy, it'just fine now. I'm active in Qt, web, json, sql domains and I've never needed a library that is Python 2 only. Thus from my own point of view, the Python 3 ecosystem is just complete now. Super.
I think the biggest barrier to adoption right now is OS support. OSX still comes bundled with python2. There's no indication that Apple is working on a transition to 3.
Ubuntu is actively working on the transition but the current LTS release (ie the one companies/enterprise will use) is still locked onto python2.
The same can likely be said for other flavors of *nix.
From a user's perspective, python3 has been ready for 'prime time' for a while. From an OS, systems, enterprise perspective python3 still is still a ways out.