Yes, but that is kind of a weak argument, since the situation with python 3 changes quickly. More and more libraries are being ported each month. Supporting python 2 obviously just harms the python ecosystem, as nobody interested in having two languages ;) And pypy could be a very strong argument, and not only for a python community.
On 2011-08-16, at 10:42 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > 2011/8/16 Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com>: >> Re option #1, just trying to start a discussion: >> >> I know it's a hard topic, but why not to adapt python 3? Python 3 is the >> future, everybody understands and accepts that. Pypy doesn't have >> substantially good support of c-extenstions, so, let's say, numpy has to be >> rewritten anyways. RDB drivers are also poorly supported, while python 3 >> has an excellent pypostgresql written entirely in python. Django, twisted >> and even zope will support python 3 eventually, it is a matter of time. Why >> not to start the move now, and do all the heavy work of rewriting numpy & >> other libs in python 3 to save time later? > > Likely the usual argument about Python 3: Most libraries and code are > Python 2. People are interested in using PyPy now and now is Python 2. > > (I personally don't care but this is because I mostly work on Python > implementations, and my income doesn't depend on Python 2. :)) > > > > -- > Regards, > Benjamin _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
