Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by woodruffw 14 days ago
It seems to have been serious enough; I don't think Python would have succeeded as a language if they hadn't done Python 3.

> Please with your substantive comment comment.

I think binning things as drama isn't substantive, particularly when noting about the linked conversation seems dramatic. I also think they're actually talking about the thing you want (pluggable JIT), so the objection seems incongruous.
2 comments
anticorporate 14 days ago
> I don't think Python would have succeeded as a language if they hadn't done Python 3.

I assumed Python 2 was pretty much ubiquitous and that the world wasn't adopting Python 3 very quickly for a long time, but I do wonder if the applications I was working with a decade and a half ago (ArcGIS, Blender, Civ4, lots of Red Hat system tools, etc.) biased that viewpoint.

link
cdavid 14 days ago
That's debatable. We can't go back in history, but if it were not for ML/data science, I believe python 3 would have killed python. At that time web dev / CLI utilities were major use cases, and that was the time golang became mainstream.

Data science, and then ofc DL being done through python just when python 3 was kinda usable (around 3.3/3.4) was a struck of luck timing-wise.

link