Like on everything Jonathan said... and as moloko said 'the time is now'... for python 3000.
Very nice list. cu On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Jonathan Hartley <tart...@tartley.com>wrote: > On 25/01/2011 02:08, Alec Battles wrote: > >> Now, maybe the solution is to use Python 2.6 instead. Before starting >>> working on my project I knew nothing about Python, which is one of the >>> reasons I chose it over, say, Java, and thought that the 3rd version is >>> the >>> way to go. Is it not? >>> >> afaik, the main difference is the assert statement. i'm sure there are >> other differences, but as someone who rarely uses python that >> 'deeply', you should be fine if you start off on python 2. >> _______________________________________________ >> python-uk mailing list >> python-uk@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >> > Personally I think there's *heaps* of new stuff in Python 3.0, 3.1 and 3.2 > which really make the language nicer to use. Some of these have been > backported to Python 2.7, where it could be done without breaking > compatibility, but if you can use version 3, then you really should! > > Some new features of Python 3.0 that I care about: > * Many things that used to return lists now return iterators. e.g. > dict.keys(), map, filter, range, zip, etc. These can be used just the same > in 95% of your code, and are much more memory efficient, especially when > chaining them. > * Set literals: {1, 2, 3} creates a set. > * Division is now sane: 5/2 returns 2.5, instead of 2. Use operator '//' > for the old behaviour. > * extended iterable unpacking: stuff like this just works: "a, b, > *everything_else = my_list" > * packages and modules in the standard library have been moved and renamed > to be more consistent and comprehensible. > * Ordering comparisons (<, >=, etc) are now sane - comparing different > types will now in the general case raise a type error, unless they are > specific pairs of types which make sense to compare (e.g. int to float) > * Dict comprehensions: Mirroring list comprehensions, create dicts using > "{k: v for k, v in stuff}" > * no more confusion between int and long - everything is now an int (which > behaves much like the old 'long' did) > * no more confusion between old- and new-style classes, everything is now a > new-style class > > Jonathan > > > -- > Jonathan Hartley Made of meat. http://tartley.com > tart...@tartley.com +44 7737 062 225 twitter/skype: tartley > > > _______________________________________________ > python-uk mailing list > python-uk@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk >
_______________________________________________ python-uk mailing list python-uk@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
