myths about python 3
in [Python]
|
Prev: Ad hoc lists vs ad hoc tuples
Next: Python and Ruby
From: Anssi Saari on 29 Jan 2010 08:13 Daniel Fetchinson <fetchinson(a)googlemail.com> writes: >> 1. Python 3 is supported by major Linux distributions. >> >> FALSE - most distros are shipping with Python 2.4, or 2.5 at best. > > This latter statement is false, Fedora 11 and 12 come with python 2.6. How does your mention of one distro counter that claim? Personally, I'd like to see a study of what version of Python ships with what Linux distribution. Say, include the top 100 distros from distrowatch.com? I think there may a surprising number of distros that ship with no version of Python what so ever.
From: Benjamin Kaplan on 29 Jan 2010 08:54 On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Anssi Saari <as(a)sci.fi> wrote: > Daniel Fetchinson <fetchinson(a)googlemail.com> writes: > >>> 1. Python 3 is supported by major Linux distributions. >>> >>> FALSE - most distros are shipping with Python 2.4, or 2.5 at best. >> >> This latter statement is false, Fedora 11 and 12 come with python 2.6. > > How does your mention of one distro counter that claim? Personally, > I'd like to see a study of what version of Python ships with what > Linux distribution. Say, include the top 100 distros from > distrowatch.com? I think there may a surprising number of distros that > ship with no version of Python what so ever. > -- Just from a quick look, 6 of the top 10 distros on distrowatch have Python 2.6 including all of the top 4. > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >
From: Carl Banks on 29 Jan 2010 17:23 On Jan 29, 12:25 am, "Martin v. Loewis" <mar...(a)v.loewis.de> wrote: > > Well, I'd consider that an official release. Note that I didn't claim > > there was no hope PSF wouldn't change it's mind on 2.8. > > I'd like to point out that the PSF formally doesn't have any say in > this. Doesn't PSF own the Python trademark? Then it has to have a say, not over whether someone can fork the project or make another official release, but over whether they can do so and still call it Python. Carl Banks
From: Blog on 29 Jan 2010 22:50 On 1/28/2010 8:44 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: > Steve Holden<steve(a)holdenweb.com> writes: >> Kindly confine your debate to the facts and keep the snide remarks to >> yourself. Like it or not Python 3 is the future, and unladen swallow's >> recent announcement that they would target only Python 3 represented a >> ground-breaking advance for the language. > > My take on things is that doing unladen swallow really "right" will > require yet more incompatible changes; i.e., the result will either > still leave quite a bit of performance on the table, or else it won't be > compatible with the current specification of Python 3 and they'll > presumably have to call it Python 4. And if Python 4 is as good as I > believe it could possibly be, then it might get wide acceptance before > Python 3 really has all that much uptake. If I have to accept > incompatibility anyway, and Python 4 gives huge improvements while > Python 3's improvements are tiny or moderate, why not skip over Python 3? There's a prime example - it's called Windows Vista! ;)
From: Ben Finney on 29 Jan 2010 23:06
Blog <Blogtest77(a)gmail.com> writes: > (Debian does ship with 2.5, but the next major release "sid' is due > out in Q2) Sid is the perpetual development playground (“unstable”), never released as a suite, but a proving ground for packages to determine their fitness for going to the next level of testing. The next-to-be-released suite is Squeeze (currently “testing”), which has Python 2.5 (the default 'python') and Python 2.6. -- \ “If you define cowardice as running away at the first sign of | `\ danger, screaming and tripping and begging for mercy, then yes, | _o__) Mr. Brave man, I guess I'm a coward.” —Jack Handey | Ben Finney |