On 25/05/2014 12:02, mm0fmf wrote:
On 25/05/2014 11:24, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 25/05/2014 09:17, bookaa bookaa wrote:
Maybe I will work on Python 3 later.
That's good to know, it'll save me wasting my time looking at it now.
OT:
Mark, you've been pro-Python3 enough in your recent postings you have
forced me to act. I've just upgraded my 1st Python2 app to Python3. 2to3
did 99.999% of the work and I had to get a more modern version of a
package which was Python3 compatible.
From Tuesday (Monday is a holiday), all new Python code at work will be
Python3
Andy
I merely think Python 3 is the way to go, and that the Python 2.8 crew
don't so much have loose screws, but never had them fitted in the first
place.
FTR I entirely agree with Roy Smith about sticking with Python 2 in his
situation, strikes me as a complete no brainer.
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
