Sadly this is right. Many people see python 2 as the end of the line and python 3 as a different language. The port from python 2 to 3 cannot be automated (who are you kidding!) you must really understand the details of the code to port it without mistakes. This is too expensive. If people must understand code to port it they may as well consider porting it to other languages. Breaking backward compatibility is ok when it does not result in change of behavior. print->print() is fine, except to except/as is pointless but tolerable, but swapping str/unicode for bytes/str is diabolic.
Breaking backwards compatibility was necessary. Python 2 has glaring flaws, which doesn't mean 3 is perfect, but no one took the decision lightly. The language is better for it, to deny that is incredibly shortsighted.
I agree it is a better language (with some caveats). The issues are not technical, they are social. The features added are not worth the cost. At least not yet.
4
u/mdipierro May 26 '14
Sadly this is right. Many people see python 2 as the end of the line and python 3 as a different language. The port from python 2 to 3 cannot be automated (who are you kidding!) you must really understand the details of the code to port it without mistakes. This is too expensive. If people must understand code to port it they may as well consider porting it to other languages. Breaking backward compatibility is ok when it does not result in change of behavior. print->print() is fine, except to except/as is pointless but tolerable, but swapping str/unicode for bytes/str is diabolic.