On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 02:11:22 +0000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 17:17:14 -0700, Peter wrote: > >> If your desire is to "learn" Python then I would stick to 2.7 >> >> My reasoning would be that there are still a significant number of >> packages that have not been ported to 3.x (and may never be ported). > > But if all you want is to learn Python, then those packages are > irrelevant. If I want to learn to write Python code, why should I care > about SomePackage, regardless of whether it supports Python 3.x or 2.x > or even 1.x? As a beginner to the language, I don't even know it exists, > and chances are I'm never going to use it. > > (I was happily using Python using only the standard library for about > seven years before I installed my first third-party library.) > > You may not have intended it this way, but the argument "stick to Python > 2, because packages!" is a typical troll response. It might have been a > reasonable response six years ago, when there weren't many (or even any) > major packages that supported Python 3,
Hardly surprising given that Python 3 came out four years ago. Sorry, brain-fart. I meant four years ago. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
