In my experience a lot of the problems with automatically converting existing Python 2 code to Python 3 code is that the Python 2 code usually makes fundamentally broken assumptions when it comes to unicode and bytes.
This is what the author doesn't get- the fact that Python 2 makes no distinction between bytes-like objects and string-like objects is a bug, not a feature. He finds his code so awful to migrate because he has built it on a contrary assumption.
I was working on a side project and ended up upgrading because I could figure out how Python was encoding my data. I got so frustrated with the semantics I found it easier to jusy upgrade.
Definitely disagree. I am a literal genius, wrote compilers, learned a dozen programming languages for fun, but prefer to do hard things. Yes p2 handling of coding is broken, but p3 is much worse. Making a theoretical argument about a pragmatic problem is a category mistake. And it's not even the core of Zed's expressed concern, which is the arrogant and abusive manipulation of the user community in service of the interests of self-obsessed project.
such smart. impressed. "p2" "p3". knows unique terminology. literal genius. so smart. A dozen programming languages just for fun? You definitely know what you're talking about and have very worthwhile contributions. People should listen to you.
I like what you said about self-obsessed project. It's clear that you have a very well reasoned position, not just opinion. What you say makes irrefutable sense.