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

Why CCP is still using Python 2

robg3d.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 95 posts

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#11

Post by Suro »

KaiserPro wrote: post #3

As someone who works in VFX I can sympathise with CCP on this. However the real question is: why should port everything to 3? none of the software in VFX uses it, plus a lot of people aren't really up to speed with the changes. What is the point? yes the language "purer" but that doesn't make my life easier......

The point of maintaining the source code to the latest version is to guarantee its survival to the long term: at some point you will have to pass the ownership to another, younger, dev that might not have been taught into this older technology; or port your script to a newer hardware, and eventually deal with an sub-optimal or incomplete VM.

Either you maintain to the latest version and distribute the cost in time or one day you will have to start from scratch, and probably lose more time and money to do so. See every organization still running on XP ? They may be sentence to death in 3 month, that may be the hardest way learn it.

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#12

Post by panzi »

KaiserPro wrote: post #3

As someone who works in VFX I can sympathise with CCP on this. However the real question is: why should port everything to 3? none of the software in VFX uses it, plus a lot of people aren't really up to speed with the changes. What is the point? yes the language "purer" but that doesn't make my life easier......

Well, Blender uses Python 3. :P (I know, not an option for people who already use something else.)

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#13

Post by viraptor »

I wonder if things would look differently if they made everything more modular and went for opensource approach. Sure it has it's downsides, but from what they list:

- "We have our own localization solution inside EVE..." - if it's better than gettext, other people would use it too and some would push for porting it to py3

- "We just removed a custom importer we’ve wanted to remove for years..." - was it for DI? would it become a better framework on its own if it was adopted in other codebases?

- "Ultimately we’ve been ... monolithic" - maybe that's also something they noticed

It would be great in cases like this to look into an alternative reality where they both used available modules and opensourced any big chunk they created themselves and see how things turned out. Maybe they would be worse for some reason...

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#15

Post by lars_francke »

drewcrawford wrote: post #2

I don think it should surprise anyone here that users with enterprise-size Python codebases aren't jumping to Python 3. PEP 373 doesn't end support until 2015, and I assume at that point RHEL or maybe even someone in the python community will pick up the torch (a la Rails LTS). I think by far the more interesting question is what is going on with today's green-field projects (a.k.a. the enterprises in the making). Wh…

Some support for your point regarding the LTS: The yet to be released RHEL 7 still has Python 2.7.5[1] bundled and not Python 3.

RHEL 5 & 6 are being supported for 10 to 13 years[2].

I'd assume that RH will provide any improvements made though - aren't they even required to?

[1] https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_E... [2] https://access.redhat.com/site/support/policy/updates/errata...

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#16

Post by watwut »

Suro wrote: post #11
KaiserPro wrote: post #3

As someone who works in VFX I can sympathise with CCP on this. However the real question is: why should port everything to 3? none of the software in VFX uses it, plus a lot of people aren't really up to speed with the changes. What is the point? yes the language "purer" but that doesn't make my life easier......

The point of maintaining the source code to the latest version is to guarantee its survival to the long term: at some point you will have to pass the ownership to another, younger, dev that might not have been taught into this older technology; or port your script to a newer hardware, and eventually deal with an sub-optimal or incomplete VM. Either you maintain to the latest version and distribute the cost in time or…

I'm pretty sure young techs are able to learn technologies they not have been taught into.

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#18

Post by berkut »

panzi wrote: post #12
KaiserPro wrote: post #3

As someone who works in VFX I can sympathise with CCP on this. However the real question is: why should port everything to 3? none of the software in VFX uses it, plus a lot of people aren't really up to speed with the changes. What is the point? yes the language "purer" but that doesn't make my life easier......

Well, Blender uses Python 3. :P (I know, not an option for people who already use something else.)

Blender's hardly used in high-end VFX production, due to scalability and interface issues...

Houdini's got dual 2/3 support though.

Re: Why CCP is still using Python 2

#19

Post by roel_v »

Suro wrote: post #11
KaiserPro wrote: post #3

As someone who works in VFX I can sympathise with CCP on this. However the real question is: why should port everything to 3? none of the software in VFX uses it, plus a lot of people aren't really up to speed with the changes. What is the point? yes the language "purer" but that doesn't make my life easier......

The point of maintaining the source code to the latest version is to guarantee its survival to the long term: at some point you will have to pass the ownership to another, younger, dev that might not have been taught into this older technology; or port your script to a newer hardware, and eventually deal with an sub-optimal or incomplete VM. Either you maintain to the latest version and distribute the cost in time or…

"See every organization still running on XP ? They may be sentence to death in 3 month, that may be the hardest way learn it."

Huh? XP will just be chugging along, for another decade probably in some places. There are still business being run on DOS software FFS. What is the easiest - pay for a complete replacement somewhere in the next decade or two, or upgrading everything every few years to stay with the times?

(written from Windows XP and not likely to move for at least another half year...)

Post reply on HN