11–20 of 392 posts
IMHO, Jython 3 would be more useful than Python 2.8, but it's your project. We have a project at work and the only reason we need to support 2.7 is because we want to run under Jython. Anyway, I would like to hear other people's use cases for Python 2.7.
I don't think this is a good idea simply because it reduces the need to upgrade your library from 2.x to 3. It's a clear cut and a good chance to weed out unmaintained libraries
Or possibly it makes it easier to have code that works on both. Although that requires this to catch on enough that 2.7 compatibility isn't required.
The worst thing about open source is that people can do stupid stuff with your software. If you're going to create this abomination, at least do us all a favour and DON'T call it Python. Call it Retardython or something. I don't want to imagine people coming into the official support channels and claiming they are using "Python 2.8", then other people lecturing them about what that software really is, etc. Sounds lik…
IMHO, Jython 3 would be more useful than Python 2.8, but it's your project. We have a project at work and the only reason we need to support 2.7 is because we want to run under Jython. Anyway, I would like to hear other people's use cases for Python 2.7.
Isn't Jython (generally) dead? The main site seems to be stuck in 2015.
this is incredible - give me unicode support in python 2. asyncio ? probably .. i'll still be happy with gevent. This is a clear path for a python upgrade.
Python 2 supports unicode and asyncio.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or possibly it makes it easier to have code that works on both. Although that requires this to catch on enough that 2.7 compatibility isn't required.
That would mean someone develops a library that uses features of Python 3, but needs some horrible hacking to port those features to Python 2. Thanks, but no - please make a cut and decide or split it in two separate packages.
The worst thing about open source is that people can do stupid stuff with your software. If you're going to create this abomination, at least do us all a favour and DON'T call it Python. Call it Retardython or something. I don't want to imagine people coming into the official support channels and claiming they are using "Python 2.8", then other people lecturing them about what that software really is, etc. Sounds lik…
I guess the intention was a bit different: he wanted to have stackless features in python. It's not clear to me the reason he decided to back down, whether because of licensing issues or just because the other python developers didn't like it.
[1] http://www.stackless.com/pipermail/stackless/2014-January/00...