Ah, what I should have done is note that I am writing Python 2.7 (and this is at work, with all that entails...), but am happy to take advice that applies only to Python 3 (even 3.5 or 3.6.0a1!) and work backwards to apply it to Python 2.7.
I think I would be (perhaps pleasantly) surprised if there was a wide gulf between Python 2.7 and Python 3 *in terms of advice/resources applicable to my original question*. Based on my (admittedly shallow) understanding of overall Python 2.7/3 differences, the biggest changes (from e.g. http://sebastianraschka.com/Articles/2014_python_2_3_key_diff.html) tend to be a bit lower level (utf-8 str) than what I'm focused on (maintainable and testable classes, functions, modules, etc). Thanks for the pointer to Code Like A Pythonista and the feedback on 2.7 vs 3! Jacob On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: > Jacob Scott <jacob.sc...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Today, I'm happily writing primarily Python (unfortunately, 2.7 -- but > I'm > > not sure it makes that much of a difference) > > Python 2.7 is still viable, but is certainly a dead end. The difference > increases month by month, and the advantage is only going to increase to > Python 3. > > Any new code base should not be written in Python 2. Any libraries you > need which don't work yet on Python 3 should be seriously reconsidered. > > > I'd appreciate any pointers to resources I might have missed, general > > thoughts on the topic, etc. > > Code Like A Pythonista was written in the Python 2 era > <http://python.net/~goodger/projects/pycon/2007/idiomatic/handout.html> > but is still excellent advice today. > > -- > \ “I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the | > `\ best.” —Oscar Wilde, quoted in _Chicago Brothers of the Book_, | > _o__) 1917 | > Ben Finney > > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
