Why oh why didn't Gweedo make it backwards comparable with python 2600 ? I mean he's a smart guy coming up with FIOC but this is just lunacy. There must be a method to his madness.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-12 4:54
I'd have no problem with him making it backwards incompatible, if I felt that he actually fixed anything.
>>1
The point was to make advancements that may or may not be backwards compatible. If you want backwards compatibility, then stay with the Python 2.x line.
Of all the possible criticisms of Py3K, the lack of backward compatibility is the least significant. A lot of people like to complain about it, though, because that's an issue that doesn't require any actual understanding of FIOC.
At DjangoCon.eu this year there was a talk about WSGI and Python 3†. It was clear that there is no real problem being solved, the 2to3 tool sucks, the coders have no idea what they are doing and backward compatibility is much more important than Guido's stupid pet peeves.
Everybody knows Python 3 is going the way of PHP 6.
>>8
The difficulties people are having getting their strings and bytes and shit in order is proof that they should have been separate from the very start.