On Wed, 2010-06-09, Deadly Dirk wrote: > On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:52:44 -0700, alex23 wrote: > > >> Unless you have a clear need for 3rd party libraries that currently >> don't have 3.x versions, starting with Python 3 isn't a bad idea.
But see below. > From what I see, most of the people are still using Python 2.x. My reason > for learning Python is the fact that my CTO decided that the new company > standard for scripting languages will be Python. Not a bad choice. > I've been using Perl for > 15 years and it was completely adequate but, apparently, Perl is no > longer in. I hope your CTO still lets you use Perl for the things Perl does better (like quickly and elegantly parse huge text files, and various one-liners). For many other tasks, I think you will quickly find Python superior. > I am afraid that Python3 is like Perl 6, the one with Parrot: > everybody is reading articles about it but nobody is using it. It seemed like that for a year or two (when people regularly called it "Python 3000"). Now it's in use -- although perhaps not so much as you would think when you read comp.lang.python. I am still perfectly happy with Python 2.4 and 2.5. These are the versions which are installed by default in modern, recent Linux distributions. I bet it will be years before Python 3 replaces them. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
