Hacker News Reader

Comment by coldtea | Hacker News Reader

>Besides speed, I never seen any good argument that would make me start a new project on 2.7, rather than the latest v3 release.

That's because you start "new projects". Some of us have 10+ years of codebases to maintain, and we don't care for Python 3 features...

View on HN

If you don't care about the Python 3 features, then don't migrate. I suspect that the issue is that you want at least some of the features, but the cost of moving 10+ years of Python 2 to Python 3 just aren't worth the benefits of those new features.

While I do believe that your point is still valid, one also have to accept that Python 2 will be a legacy platform at some point. In the long run I don't view that as much different than people complaining about Visual Basic 6 being deprecated.

Python 3.0 was released in 2008. Python 2 will EOL in 2020. You've had about 9 years to start the transition to 3.0, and you still have 3 more years before EOL. A 12-year upgrade window sounds pretty reasonable.

>You've had about 9 years to start the transition to 3.0, and you still have 3 more years before EOL.

Most of those years library support was non-existent or lacking. And still today the majority uses Python 2.x (Pypi stats).

So it's not like the migration was some great success since the start, and all those years were just wasted by some minority not migrating.

In the end, it's not a discussion on HN or what the "BDFL" says about an official EOL that will settle the matter, but actual adoption in the field. But in addition to the low adoption rate, we've even seen people leave Python for Go and Node/JS.

I think I know the chart you're referring to, but I can't find it. I remember Python 2 was in the majority in that case. Do you have the source handy?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com