On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 September 2017 at 13:07, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Fortunately, it's not that hard to type "python3" all the time. OS >> distributions can progressively shift to using that name, and then >> eventually not ship a Py2 until/unless something depends on it, all >> without losing backward compatibility. > > My main objections to needing to type "python3" are: > > * It perpetuates the illusion that Python 3 isn't the "real" Python, > and creates a feedback loop that makes it harder to persuade people > that we're ready to make Python 3 the default. > * It makes it harder to write cross-platform instructions that > encompass Windows, which doesn't have a "python3" executable. > > But both of these are weak arguments and as usual, practicality beats purity.
Windows doesn't have a "python" executable either (at least, not in PATH), so that's same-same. And people should be being trained to type "python2" vs "python3", not "python" vs "python3", so it's going to be the same there too. Notably, SOME platforms already have "python" aliased to "python3", so cross-platform scripts MUST be explicit if they want Py2. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
