Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Python 3 in 2016

hynek.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 194 posts

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#21

Post by andrewstuart »

hynek wrote: post #8
andrewstuart wrote: post #2

The PyPi download statistics are constantly being quoted as though the are some exact representation of the state of Python 3 takeup. I'm calling this as bullshit. How much of these downloads are computers auto updating their configurations? How, exactly, do these stats reflect the number of people developing current projects with Python 3? The number of legacy projects written in Python 2 will be vastly higher than…

Hmm I’m not sure how to take this comment. The main point of the article is basically that those numbers don’t tell the whole story (even explicitly in footnote 1).

Your post gives the stats some level of credit when really they tell absolutely nothing, or more precisely they tell a tale that is so open to interpretation as to mean nothing at all.

There's no gloom around Python 3. Lots of people support it. The highest ever upvoted post on Reddit/r/Python was a post asking to remove training material that asserts that Python 3 is irrelevant. https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/top/ There must be alot of people who feel positively about Python 3 to vote it up that high, presumably at the same time that the Python 2 diehards are voting the post down.

The appropriate message regarding the PyPi stats is not to give gentle credence to them but to condemn them as a completely irrelevant measure of the success or otherwise of Python 3.

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#22

Post by hynek »

andrewstuart wrote: post #21
hynek wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm I’m not sure how to take this comment. The main point of the article is basically that those numbers don’t tell the whole story (even explicitly in footnote 1).

Your post gives the stats some level of credit when really they tell absolutely nothing, or more precisely they tell a tale that is so open to interpretation as to mean nothing at all. There's no gloom around Python 3. Lots of people support it. The highest ever upvoted post on Reddit/r/Python was a post asking to remove training material that asserts that Python 3 is irrelevant. https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/top/…

Hm that’s unfortunate that it comes out that way. I thought I’m just acknowledging that people are agonizing over them and then explain why’s not a good metric.

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#23

Post by retrogradeorbit »

I've done a lot of Python for many years and its all been Python 2. Python 3 seems to be a decent improvement, and if I was working on a Python 3 project, that would be fine. But when it comes to new projects, I struggle to find a compelling reason to use Python at all, when there are so many amazing languages now to choose from. With a new project you could choose Scala, Haskell, Clojure, Erlang (or Elixir) or Go. And there's also the less popular ones like Haxe and Dart. I've even been playing around with Elm. And I'm sure I've missed a bunch of others too.

So the question for me, for new projects is: why choose Python 3 (over all the other non python options) at all? Not what's better about Python 3 than Python 2, but what's better about Python 3 than those other choices. These other choices all have certain areas where they have great strengths. What is Python 3's strength when compared to these other languages? It's a mutable, imperative, single CPU bound language that can't target the browser and is extremely difficult to distribute and deploy. Or have these issues been fixed?

I don't mean to troll any Python fanboys. I use Python 2 every single day at work and I'm very happy with it. But what does Python 3 offer that other new languages don't? Because when you are starting a new project you can choose anything. Why should I choose Python 3 for my new projects?

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#24

Post by orf »

ivoras wrote: post #19

Since 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…

Comments like this are so misguided and yet so common on HN. Adding a freaking JIT to CPython is a ridiculous suggestion that will never happen for a whole load of reasons. Getting rid of the GIL is more noble, but seems impossible to do without breaking compatibility.

Python 4 will just be the next release after Python 3.9.

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#25

Post by vegabook »

Three is (finally) likely to win, if only because of the constant nagging of the project leaders, and the fact that some distros will now move to it by default. But it will be a pyrrhic victory because it will have been a force-feed, not an enthusiastic, willing, adoption by the community. As a result of this mess, while Python's inertia is huge, its momentum is slowing. Its leadership, having lost credibility, cannot really lead effectively anymore.

It will continue to be a massive, unavoidable language, but something of the magic of when I first learned it, has been snuffed out.

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#26

Post by EvanPlaice »

amstocker wrote: post #4

I think this is a nice healthy view to have about Python 2 to 3. Can't wait until python 4!

I seriously doubt 4 will include breaking changes, at least not to the semantics/syntax of the language itself.

What python really needs in 4 is better unified package management and distribution support. They have a lot to learn from the Javascript and Ruby evosystems.

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#27

Post by ZenoArrow »

ivoras wrote: post #19

Since 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…

> "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."

Guido could do that if he decided that Python 4 would be based on PyPy (AFAIK, many people thought Python 3 would be based on PyPy too). Compatibility isn't 100% but if it was the main platform I'm sure it'd improve even faster.

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#28

Post by emmelaich »

EvanPlaice wrote: post #20
wiz21c wrote: post #14

Since 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…

I suspect that many Pythoners will install Python3 (with homebrew) or other on OSX (and whatever other platforms still come with just Python2)

Re: Python 3 in 2016

#30

Post by hynek »

vegabook wrote: post #25

Three is (finally) likely to win, if only because of the constant nagging of the project leaders, and the fact that some distros will now move to it by default. But it will be a pyrrhic victory because it will have been a force-feed, not an enthusiastic, willing, adoption by the community. As a result of this mess, while Python's inertia is huge, its momentum is slowing. Its leadership, having lost credibility, canno…

That’s only true for people who are part of the community for a long time. Newcomers don’t understand what the fuss is about and why anyone would want to use Python 2.

My own Python bubble is more like what you described (although the mood is improving IMHO) but talking to newcomers is eye opening.

Post reply on HN