[a1a]

"Tool of your trade": I have no use of python 3, nor do I have any use for Scala, Perl, or whatever. These could all be considered "tools of my trade".

I rarely write anything high language besides small scripts. Python 2 does the job. If I ever were to need functionality of another language, great, it's fun to learn something new. Our time is limited and we must prioritize. Sadly we cannot invest time to learn everything (well I guess it's possible, but I rather be awesome in four languages than mediocre in twenty).

[kazagistar]

It will take you an hour at most to read up on all the significant changes in Python 3. Its not like learning Scala or Perl at all. It just cuts some things that have been depreciated for years, makes everything more consistently iterable, adds some nice new comprehensions and literals, modifies certain bits of metaprogramming, and a few other smaller changes. The hardest thing for me was remembering that print is a function in 3, and needs parens.

[pfraze]

@a1a I apologize, I was a jerk yesterday. I definitely dropped my forum manners. Not ok!

Just so you do know what the story is with python3: It's mostly a move to proper unicode support (which couldn't be done without breaking backwards compat) but it's a relatively minor change for most code. You'll definitely run into some library support issues, but they should be few and getting fewer. It shouldn't be terrible, and I'd encourage you to do it just for the sake of Guido and the python community, because this transition has been a bit of a burden for them.

[dragonwriter]

> I have no use of python 3

You admit you haven't done any research, so you clearly don't have any basis for making that statement.

[a1a]

Nor have I done research on Perl, Scala, etc. Your missing my point. I am successfully getting my things done in Python 2. I do not have any use for Python 3, Perl, Scala, or any other language. I might have in the future, and hey, some language might be better suited to solve the problem - but as long as it's not drastically better the sensible tradeoff is to stick with Python 2.

[goostavos]

That philosophy sounds like one that will cause you to wake up one day and realize your skill set is massively out if date.

Python 3, scala, and pearl all give you new ways of solving a problem. You're missing out on a lot of super cool stuff by not exploring! Outside of maybe library support, I see no reason to not to at least check out python 3.

[a1a]

Fair point. But I'd like to quote my own post above:

>I rarely write anything high language besides small scripts. Python 2 does the job. If I ever were to need

>functionality of another language, great, it's fun to learn something new. Our time is limited and we must

>prioritize. Sadly we cannot invest time to learn everything (well I guess it's possible, but I rather be

>awesome in four languages than mediocre in twenty).

[chc]

I'll let you in on a secret: Python 3 is Python, just with a couple of improvements. Painting it as an entirely new language like Perl or Scala reminds me of people I used to support who thought their entire computer was different if I gave them a monitor with a different-colored rim. You're making a mountain out of a molehill.

[knappe]

So much for having a big toolbox with lots of different hammers available to you.

[a1a]

I do have a big toolbox, it contains all kinds of screwdrivers etc for low level programming. But I only need one hammer for the few problems I face that is best solved by scripting languages.

[6d0debc071]

To be fair, most of the people I see with sheds with a load of tools in them don't make much and wouldn't know where to begin if they suddenly had to. It's the appearance of the thing that they love.