On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:57 AM, <duf...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am starting to have doubts as to whether Python 3.x will ever be > actually adopted by the Python community at large as their standard. Years > have passed, and a LARGE number of Python programmers has not even bothered > learning version 3.x. Why am I bothered by this? Because of lot of good > libraries are still only for version 2.x, and there is no sign of their > being updated for v3.x. I get the impression as if 3.x, despite being > better and more advanced than 2.x from the technical point of view, is a > bit of a letdown in terms of adoption.
When 3.x came out, the python-dev folks practically commanded us to wait a while before diving in. I think things are mostly going according to plan. I think some little-used libraries will never get moved over. We've been seeing that 2to3 and 3to2 aren't really the main way of moving things to 3.x; instead, we're seeing a lot of code written to run, unmodified on both 2.x and 3.x. This was a bit of a surprise, I think. A document I wrote about how to do this is at http://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~dstromberg/Intro-to-Python/ I find the differences between 2.x and 3.x rather small, actually. If some people keep chanting "never going to happen", it probably won't - for them. Personally, I've been coding greenfield projects in 3.x only and liking it, and I wrote one ~10,000 line project to run on both: http://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~strombrg/backshift/ HTH
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
