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

Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 413 posts

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#231

Post by stefantalpalaru »

Flip-per wrote: post #123
surouaue wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "Django is not RoR", are you saying Django doesn't break backwards compatibility but Ruby on Rails does? If so, I have to very strongly disagree. It's almost mind boggling to me how much they break backwards compatibility as a framework. They usually warn users with a deprecation warning in one version and then they make the backwards incompatible change in the next version, but the sheer amount of these…

How else would you introduce backwards incompatible changes? Especially with the LTS upgrade path that alasdairnicol mentioned I wonder what there is still to improve.

> How else would you introduce backwards incompatible changes?

Not at all. That would have the added benefit of core developers thinking twice before introducing a new API - exactly like it happens with Linux syscalls.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#232

Post by lima »

rtpg wrote: post #157
nodamage wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fairly sure I'm handling strings correctly under Python 2. What I'm not sure of is the risk of something breaking if I upgrade to Python 3, especially when it comes to upgrading external dependencies. Even if it's just non-backwards compatible API changes, it's more risk to deal with.

You're fairly certain, but with Python 3 you can be completely certain. That's the magic of it. Python 2 will allow this to sometimes work, Python 3 will make sure this never works, because there's a bytes/text mismatch. It's nice to rule out entire classes of bugs like this from sys import argv import json with open(argv[1], 'rb') as f: json.loads(f.read()) Porting is still difficult. But when we ported from Py2 to…

Exactly this. When I ported my stuff to Python 3, I fixed many encoding bugs in the process.

You can do this correctly in Python 2, it's just much harder.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#233

Post by Chris2048 »

scrollaway wrote: post #229
Chris2048 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which comments are you interpreting as demands? >> A lack of being paid (money at least) doesn't imply no obligations, nor freedom from criticism. > Excellent, then you should be fine with me criticizing the attitude that's been displayed here. Great. Do you actually have a response to this point in context, then? > This is the same as the IE6 situation: Want support for it? Pay extra for it! You did not argue this.…

You're appropriating criticism that was not directed to you, but to coldtea. Here and elsewhere. Edit: Yes, appropriating . You're taking criticism I specifically directed at coldtea, applying them to your comments and then complaining it doesn't fit. I am done talking to you. Edit 2: This was not meant to sound as aggressive as it did, sorry.

appropriating? That criticism was general, so what does it matter?

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#234

Post by stefantalpalaru »

singularity2001 wrote: post #132
jdimov11 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the beginning of the Python 3 nonsense, not the end yet. It will end when the Python 3 joke is scrapped and replaced with Python 4 as a SEAMLESS continuation of Python 2.

Don't know why you were downvoted: still waiting for a seamless Python X upgrade as well, without code duplication.

It already exists, as a Python2 fork: https://github.com/naftaliharris/placeholder

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#235

Post by lewiseason »

ReticentMonkey wrote: post #108

Can we expect the async/await introduced from Python 3 for async request handling or maybe some heavy operations ? Something like sanic: https://github.com/channelcat/sanic

It seems like that'll come, but that it'll cause some issues with some WSGI implementations.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/5otufg/django_20_no...

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#236

Post by rowanseymour »

I'm glad they are making a clean break from Python 2 and I hope this pushes other projects in the ecosystem to fix those remaining libraries without Python 3 support. It does get a bit frustrating when things break between Django releases, but they have a good system of deprecating things for a couple of releases beforehand. And at the end of the day, Django is for people who want to build websites, not life support machines... and I think they're doing a decent job of striking a balance between breakage and stagnation.

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#237

Post by brachi »

gtaylor wrote: post #67
vegabook wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that personally I see the benefit of Systemd every time I boot my linux computer. It just works, fast, and clean. I don't partake in the philosophical arguments. I just want it to work. Py3 by contrast, simply throws cruft curveballs at me. No tangible benefit. This is not a systemd-style issue. And yes Python will likely continue massively to be used in the sciences, 3 bears like me notwithstanding, so it wou…

> core base of users and please could they focus on them instead of the web people who are much more fickle and moving already. Ahhh, I see what's going on now. You may be vastly underestimating the size of variety of the Python userbase. This is one of the absolute most popular languages on the planet. Your science subset is but one of many. And it's not even the biggest if we're talking sheer user counts. Python mu…

Directly from core devs: https://snarky.ca/why-python-3-exists/

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#238

Post by mark-r »

I was surprised to see the elimination of the encoding comments, I thought that the default encoding would be platform dependent. After a little research I found PEP 3120 which mandates UTF-8 for everybody, implemented in Python 3.0. It also goes into the history of source encoding for 1.x and 2.x. I wonder why there aren't more problems with Windows users whose editors don't use UTF-8 by default?

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#239

Post by Chris2048 »

joeyspn wrote: post #119
stevehiehn wrote: post #10

Good. I've been getting into python a bit because i have an interest in datascience. I'm mostly a Java dev. I have to say the python2/3 divide is a real turn off. Many of the science libs want to use seem to be in 2.7 with no signs of moving.

> Many of the science libs want to use seem to be in 2.7 with no signs of moving The most important scientific libraries have pledged to drop support before 2020, and are all python3-ready http://www.python3statement.org/

Is Numpy on that list?

Re: Removing Python 2.x support from Django for version 2.0

#240

Post by StRoy »

aaronbasssett wrote: post #141
jdimov11 wrote: post #81

Says who?? Someone with delusions of grandeur, obviously. Because that's not up to anyone to say. Python 2 is obviously NOT going away any time soon. You can't just look at reality and claim the opposite just because it pleases you. Python 2 is here to stay and is in MUCH better shape than Python 3, in terms of actual production usage globally. Python 3 is a bad joke that someone wants to force down people's throats…

Says the Python maintainers? And it is completely up to them to say - http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/#update Of course you can continue using Python 2.x after 2020 but you will receive no security/bug fixes.

> Of course you can continue using Python 2.x after 2020 but you will receive no security/bug fixes.

I keep seeing this irrelevant line all the time from Python 3 Ayatollah and High Priests. Python 2 isn't only CPython. So what if the Python foundation stops maintaining CPython? Dropbox is writing a new, efficient Python 2 implementation to make their legacy Python programs run faster while they slowly port to Go.

There's Pyston, there's PyPy, there's Jython, there's IronPython. We don't depend on CPython security fixes thank you very much. And so far none of them have made an EOL announcement of their Python 2 releases, while in the case of Pyston, being Python 2 is a must, dropbox is never going to port anything to Python 3. If something is worth wasting time with Python 3, it's worth rewriting in Go.

Post reply on HN