[Python-Dev] Python 2.x and 3.x use survey, 2014 edition (original) (raw)

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Thu Dec 11 21:17:31 CET 2014

On Thu Dec 11 2014 at 3:14:42 PM Dan Stromberg <drsalists at gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Mark Roberts <wizzat at gmail.com> wrote: > I disagree. I know there's a huge focus on The Big Libraries (and wholesale > migration is all but impossible without them), but the long tail of > libraries is still incredibly important. It's like saying that migrating the > top 10 Perl libraries to Perl 6 would allow people to completely ignore all > of CPAN. It just doesn't make sense.

Things in the Python 2.x vs 3.x world aren't that bad. See: https://python3wos.appspot.com/ and https://wiki.python.org/moin/PortingPythonToPy3k http://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~strombrg/Intro-to-Python/ (writing code to run on 2.x and 3.x) I believe just about everything I've written over the last few years either ran on 2.x and 3.x unmodified, or ran on 3.x alone. If you go the former route, you don't need to wait for your libraries to be updated. I usually run pylint twice for my projects (after each change, prior to checkin), once with a 2.x interpreter, and once with a 3.x interpreter (using http://stromberg.dnsalias.org/svn/this-pylint/trunk/this-pylint) , but I gather pylint has the option of running on a 2.x interpreter and warning about anything that wouldn't work on 3.x.

Pylint 1.4 has a --py3k flag to run only checks related to Python 3 compatibility under Python 2. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20141211/d28f0e57/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list