stackoverflow quote on Python

[Mark Lawrence]

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/python

"Python has two major versions (2 and 3) in use which have significant
differences."

I believe that this is incorrect. The warts have been removed, but
significant differences, not in my book. If there is agreement about
there not being significant differences, should stackoverflow be asked
to change their wording?

--
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[Ian Kelly]

They have differences, and those differences are significant in that
they must often be taken into account when asking or answering
questions about Python on stackoverflow.

[Steven D'Aprano]

Define "significant".

If StackOverflow mean "significant like the differences between Lisp and
Cobol", then they are clearly wrong.

On the other hand, if you are suggesting that nothing short of the
differences between Lisp and Cobol count as significant, then I think you
too are wrong.

There are clear differences between the two versions, and the much-talked-
about "print is now a function" is the least among them:

* major reorganisation of parts of the standard library, with many
libraries being removed, renamed, reorganised, or added;

* file objects are completely re-implemented;

* strings are now proper text strings (Unicode), not byte strings;

* nonlocal;

* keyword-only parameters for functions;

* cannot use grouped parameters in functions, e.g. def spam(a, (b,c), d)
no longer is allowed;

* cannot use "import *" inside a function;

* dict methods keys(), values(), items() are iterators;

* so are map, reduce, zip;

* builtins like reduce, reload have been moved to modules;

* some itertools functions are now builtins;

* sorted and list.sort no longer support comparison functions;

* comparisons between different types may raise TypeError;

* extended iterable unpacking;

* function annotations;

* dict comprehensions and set literals;

* new metaclass syntax;

* classic classes are gone;

* automatic delegation doesn't work for __dunder__ methods;

* backticks `x` gone;


among others. Are these "significant" differences? Well, maybe.



--
Steven

[Alister]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 03:08:54 +0000, Mark Lawrence wrote:

I think you are confusing significant with fundamental

they are significant differences because failing to take them into
account may cause incorrect operation.
they are not fundamental differences because someone familiar with on
version should have minimal difficulty in understanding the other.




--
Lee's Law:
Mother said there would be days like this,
but she never said that there'd be so many!

[wxjm...@gmail.com]

Le mardi 13 novembre 2012 06:42:19 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 03:08:54 +0000, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
>
>
>
> * strings are now proper text strings (Unicode), not byte strings;
>

----

Let me laugh.

jmf

[Mark Lawrence]

On 13/11/2012 13:21, wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le mardi 13 novembre 2012 06:42:19 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a �crit :

>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 03:08:54 +0000, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> * strings are now proper text strings (Unicode), not byte strings;
>>
>
> ----
>
> Let me laugh.
>
> jmf
>

Presumably because you're looking at yourself in a mirror, and have
finally realised that you've completely misunderstood the work done with
unicode in Python 3, specifically Python 3.3?

--
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[Ethan Furman]

wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le mardi 13 novembre 2012 06:42:19 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a �crit :

>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 03:08:54 +0000, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> * strings are now proper text strings (Unicode), not byte strings;

> Let me laugh.

*plonk*

[Thomas Rachel]

Am 13.11.2012 14:21 schrieb wxjm...@gmail.com:

>> * strings are now proper text strings (Unicode), not byte strings;
>

> Let me laugh.

Do so.


Thomas

[wxjm...@gmail.com]

Le mardi 13 novembre 2012 16:53:30 UTC+1, Mark Lawrence a écrit :
> On 13/11/2012 13:21, wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
>

> > Le mardi 13 novembre 2012 06:42:19 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
>
> >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 03:08:54 +0000, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> * strings are now proper text strings (Unicode), not byte strings;
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > ----
>
> >
>
> > Let me laugh.
>
> >
>
> > jmf
>
> >
>
>
>
> Presumably because you're looking at yourself in a mirror, and have
>
> finally realised that you've completely misunderstood the work done with
>
> unicode in Python 3, specifically Python 3.3?
>
>
>
> --
>
> Cheers.
>
>
>
> Mark Lawrence.

--------

I'am still fascinated by the mathematically absurd "negative
logic" used in and by the flexible string representation
(algorithm).

jmf

[Chris Angelico]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 7:56 PM, <wxjm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'am still fascinated by the mathematically absurd "negative
> logic" used in and by the flexible string representation
> (algorithm).

I am still fascinated that you persist in comparing a buggy old Python
against a bug-free new Python and haven't noticed the difference.

ChrisA