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

Sunsetting Python 2

python.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 733 posts

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#511

Post by bradenb »

normalhuman wrote: post #467
bradenb wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does pride itself on the quality of discussions. It also has done that just fine using the voting and flagging mechanisms. When I see comments criticizing others' comments I am always reminded of reddit. I think this is exactly what you're hoping to avoid when you come to HN. Beyond that, who are we to judge what constitutes "good command of language?" Which language are we even talking about here? I don't th…

> When I see comments criticizing others' comments I am always reminded of reddit. I think this is exactly what you're hoping to avoid when you come to HN. > I don't think HN is going to become a better place by becoming more elitist. err...

What confuses you about what I said? “Not being reddit” and “not being elitist” are not mutually exclusive.

EDIT: I think it's clear nothing more needs to be said. Feel free to respond to this comment or not. I've said my piece.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#513

Post by jhall1468 »

protomyth wrote: post #488
fwip wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can keep running Python 2 just like you keep your COBOL systems running, nobody's gonna stop you except common sense.

IBM does quite a good job of making sure that COBOL is supported long term with all needed updates for many many years to come. Python 2 is not in that position.

You mean, IBM does quite a good job of making sure IBM COBOL is supported long term. They are maintaining their compiler, which is exactly what PSF is doing. They are maintaining their interpreter, which is Python 3.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#514

Post by gridlockd »

mindcrime wrote: post #477
kortilla wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it’s a shitty analogy because a swap to torx is basically a single API change. The switch to py3 is more akin to using a new building material. Easy to start with once you know the differences, but it’s a bitch to retrofit if you depend on a method of construction incompatible with it. “Go change the dependency” is a naive ideal. Most non-tech businesses have no budget for that kind of tech debt work.

Most non-tech businesses have no budget for that kind of tech debt work. That's fine. I'm sure there are some that also don't have a budget for fire insurance, or a security system, or whatever. For anybody who wants to gamble with no fire insurance, or not fixing tech debt, that's a conscious choice they get to make. Now they have to be responsible for the outcome(s) of their choices.

"Hey boss, we're gonna use this hip new language that will break everything for no good reason a few years down the line."

Congratulations. You're fired.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#515

Post by pnathan »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #353
dahart wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Python 3.1 came out 10 years ago. 3.2 was released in 2011. What does that mean about the complaints since, let’s just say 2015 to be fair?

I heard several people saying that 3.6 was the first Py3 worth transitioning to. Largely for async (I think async/await came to live then). There is this take on performance: https://hackernoon.com/which-is-the-fastest-version-of-pytho...

The Py3 string handling was beyond frustrating prior to 3.6. For what I do, Unicode complexity is not required. Having to stuff it into everything was more trouble than it was worth.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#516

Post by 16bytes »

carapace wrote: post #421

Going forward, I'll be maintaining Python 2.7 for the indefinite future. This will be under project name "Bladders". (Python is named after Monty Python's Flying Circus. There is another fantastic British comedy called Black Adder, and the main character is sometimes called "Bladders" as a contraction of Black Adder.) Unlike Tauthon, I won't change the language at all, only maintenance. I'm also going to make a curat…

I don't your comment a controversial stance. I don't think the "sunsetting python 2" is controversial either.

If there is demand for python2 maintenance, there will be people--like you--working on it and companies selling support for it.

All this announcement is saying that the python community at-large (aka "We are volunteers who make and take care of the Python programming language") is focused on python3 and isn't going to work on python2 any more.

Their position makes sense, even large communities have limited budgets on development capacity, and they want to spend it only on python3. You control your own capacity, so if you want to focus on python2 you'll likely find some like-minded compatriots.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#517

Post by mindcrime »

gridlockd wrote: post #514
mindcrime wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most non-tech businesses have no budget for that kind of tech debt work. That's fine. I'm sure there are some that also don't have a budget for fire insurance, or a security system, or whatever. For anybody who wants to gamble with no fire insurance, or not fixing tech debt, that's a conscious choice they get to make. Now they have to be responsible for the outcome(s) of their choices.

"Hey boss, we're gonna use this hip new language that will break everything for no good reason a few years down the line." Congratulations. You're fired.

"Hey Joe, why did our customer database get leaked and published on a dark-net site?"

"Hey boss, we're using an outdated programming language for which security updates are no longer provided, because we were told there's no budget for fixing technical debt."

"Congratulations, you're fired."

Same outcome either way... might as well make some effort to do the right thing along the way...

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#518

Post by gridlockd »

sametmax wrote: post #508
ken wrote: post #240

Python 2 to 3 (at least by 3.3 or so) was one of the easiest transitions I've ever done. There's a library ("six") to help, and in almost all cases you can write 2-and-3 compatible code, which means you can go piece-by-piece. (Unless your manager makes drive-by commits of py2-only code, months after you all agreed that all new code should be py3-compatible, and then leaves town for a multi-week vacation...) Dependenc…

By experience, people with large Python projects often overblown the difficulty of porting in their head. Unless you have a very rare irreplaceable dependency or some terrible C extension, porting is easy. It's tedious yes. Boring even. But most projects get away with 2 weeks of investment. And yes, it pays back. Python 3 is a vastly superior language when it's about introducing less bugs or debugging existing ones.…

The entire science stack is "terrible C extensions". This is also the kind of tight-budgeted stuff that needs relatively rare Python/C developers, not just your average overpaid Python web developer.

I'm not saying we would've cured cancer if people didn't have to deal with this bullshit, but it's definitely a setback.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#519

Post by ken »

geekles wrote: post #389
sdoering wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we switched from phillips to torx, and your favorite tool brand didn't make torx drivers yet, you've got to either convince them to start, or switch brands. This is the best analogy I have yet read. Thanks - you nailed an argument I have had at multiple gigs/clients way to often. > Professionals don't get to use this as an excuse to badmouth torx, and stick with phillips. D'accord. Exactly. I had very fruitful d…

You've never encountered badmouthing from a pro builder about other tool brands? How many did you talk to? Builders make the Ford v Chevy debates look minimal in comparison.

No, never. I need to invest in power tools myself so I’ve been asking a bunch of coworkers who use their personal power tools at work. The response I hear from everybody, without fail, is “Well, there are a lot of good brands.” I don’t even hear people defending their own choices.

The one piece of concrete advice I got was “Whatever brand you get, go for the 20V, not the 12V”. Last week I saw that same guy at work showing off his 12V driver. So I’m pretty sure nothing matters, and I’ll probably just get the brand with the prettiest color.

Re: Sunsetting Python 2

#520

Post by sullyj3 »

normalhuman wrote: post #361
gjm11 wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, "for me" and "for my use case" mean subtly but genuinely different things. "For me" highlights the fact that my preferences, character, skills, etc., are different from other people's. Something might work well for me but badly for someone else because I happen to be good at working around its quirks, or bad at noticing its faults, or just not interested in the things it doesn't do. "For my use case" highlight…

Corparate-speak that makes its way into common language is frequently justified post-hoc by subtle differences in meaning like the ones you allude to. The problem is that these differences are personal and subjective. Ask someone else, they might have a different answer. I have had the same discussion multiple times over the equally meaningless and inelegant "going forward". "Use case" comes from 90s software enginee…

I really like the book "Death Sentence" by Don Watson, which eloquently skewers this kind of corporate jargon.
Post reply on HN