python 2.x or 3.x?
4082 3 0- ordiza
- Member
- 10 posts
- Joined: Aug. 2010
- Offline
- graham
- Member
- 1908 posts
- Joined: Nov. 2006
- Offline
- JColdrick
- Member
- 4140 posts
- Joined: July 2005
- Offline
This will become a big issue in the near future. Someone wanting to learn Python will understandably gravitate towards 3000, but there's a really big world out there that won't be implementing it in large projects for a very large time simply because the cost outweighs the benefits. I'm not really sure what's going to happen.
The good news, Ordiza, is that while the new things in 3000 tend to break an *awful* lot of older scripts, it's whittled down typically to 10 or so very basic reasons why, so you can safely learn 2.x and use it now in almost all contexts out there and when the time comes learning the fundamental changes in 3000 won't break your brain.
Cheers,
J.C.
The good news, Ordiza, is that while the new things in 3000 tend to break an *awful* lot of older scripts, it's whittled down typically to 10 or so very basic reasons why, so you can safely learn 2.x and use it now in almost all contexts out there and when the time comes learning the fundamental changes in 3000 won't break your brain.
Cheers,
J.C.
John Coldrick
- ordiza
- Member
- 10 posts
- Joined: Aug. 2010
- Offline
JColdrick
This will become a big issue in the near future. Someone wanting to learn Python will understandably gravitate towards 3000, but there's a really big world out there that won't be implementing it in large projects for a very large time simply because the cost outweighs the benefits. I'm not really sure what's going to happen.
The good news, Ordiza, is that while the new things in 3000 tend to break an *awful* lot of older scripts, it's whittled down typically to 10 or so very basic reasons why, so you can safely learn 2.x and use it now in almost all contexts out there and when the time comes learning the fundamental changes in 3000 won't break your brain.
Cheers,
J.C.
thanks guys!
-
- Quick Links