En Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:57:21 -0300, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > On Apr 1, 12:47 pm, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
>> Please explain how the existence of Python 3.0 would break your >> production >> code. > > The existence of battery acid won't hurt me either, unless I come into > contact with it. If one eventually upgrades to 3.0 -- which is > ostensibly the desired path -- their code could break and require > fixing. > Backward compatibility is important. C++ could break all ties with C > to "clean up" as well, but it would be a braindead move that would > break existing code bases upon upgrade. The C++ comitee has a different point of view than the Python developers, I think. You don't have to upgrade if you don't want to. Nobody will come and magically erase your installed 2.X python. 2.X sources won't be wipped out from the earth surface. Right now people is still using ten-years-old Python 1.5, and in ten years surely there will be people using Python 2.X too. (We still support things written in QuickBasic and Turbo Pascal 3.0 for DOS) There is an upgrade path, with intermediate versions, `from future import...`, automatic conversion tools (2to3), so you're not alone if you want to upgrade. The differences aren't so scaring after all, and they make 3.0 a much clean language. -- Gabriel Genellina -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
