31–40 of 194 posts
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. A…
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. A…
What it offers for me truly is the batteries included and easy, memorable and predictable syntax. (Probably due to experience).
Sure, Go is easier to deploy, Erlang and by extension Elixir are easier to scale.
But python does align very well with my personal though process. I don't think parallel and I don't have race conditions in my mind. If I want to quickly write something that will perform decently, I choose python, because the time I save by not having to learn a new language could be days or perhaps even weeks. I guess it boils down to this: with my current experience, I'm more then 10 times as productive in python as I would be in any other language.
Sure, it would be neat if I had as much experience in Erlang as I have in python, but that will take years, and at the end of the day, I'd rather finish my project this year with python, then next year with any other language.
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. A…
I posted about it:
What language has decorators, generators, comprehensions, modules, but isn't Python?
http://fourlightyears.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/what-language-...
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. A…
In the transpilers era, Javascript will never be so bad that choosing another dynamic language is a clear win. I'd go back to Python and Django for a CRUD app, but since Javascript is easier to write in a functional style than Python, I've actually started to prefer it as a first choice.
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. A…
I often dabble in other languages but in the end always return to python (3). What it offers for me truly is the batteries included and easy, memorable and predictable syntax. (Probably due to experience). Sure, Go is easier to deploy, Erlang and by extension Elixir are easier to scale. But python does align very well with my personal though process. I don't think parallel and I don't have race conditions in my mind.…
Go's lack of a package manager making deployment more painful is the thing that made me come back to python.
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.
Such as?
I really hope I'm not going to start needing 1,200 dependencies to build a simple app like I would in node.
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.
We'll see what it does to Python's popularity.
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.
Really? Why even change the major version then, when there are no breaking changes?
Given that many Python programmers seem to be traumatized by the last major version switch, why even bother?
Or is this just for setting up Python 5 can have breaking changes if the switch to 4 is painless?
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. A…
As for Py3, the standard libs are very clean and streamlined, (e.g. io). Oddly enough, the point that I love about Py3 is its handling of unicode vs bytes (which most people find it difficult for some reason).
I'm not sure what you mean by "can't target the browser"? I don't find distributing/deploying python to be difficult or even involved at all. I do get annoyed at the single CPU bound limitation.
If I had to summarize why I'd pick Py3 for new projects, I'd say because it thrives in being minimalist and I hate clutter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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)
If you maintain many FOSS libs like I do, together with tox it's priceless.