Cameron Laird wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >"Anthony Irwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > . > . > . > >| #5 someone said that they used to use python but stopped because the > >| language changed or made stuff depreciated (I can fully remember > >| which) and old code stopped working. Is code written today likely to > >| still work in 5+ years or do they depreciate stuff and you have to > >update? > > > >Most versions of Python are still available. You are free to use and > >distribute your copies indefinitely. Several older versions are still in > >use. > > > >Recent releases have added features but removed very little except bugs. > >Unfortunately, bug removal sometimes breaks code. And feature additions > >occasionally introduce bugs or otherwise break code, but that is why there > >are alpha, beta, and candidate releases before a final release. > > > >Python3 will remove many things at once. A conversion tool is being > >written. And there is no expectation that production code should be > >immediately converted, if ever. > . > . > . > I'll answer even more aggressively: Python's record of > backward compatibility is *better* than Java's.
Although I objected earlier to the statement that Python has never had a release breaking backward compatibility, I agree 100% with this--the times that Python has broken backward compatibility have been preceded by several releases of deprecation warnings. Java on several occasions has simply broken working code in a new release with no warning. I wouldn't be shocked if Python has done the same, but I've never run into it in my code. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
