> It's not that it helps in a particular way (though more on that below), it's just that starting with Python 2 now necessarily leads to rewrites later on. While you can see packages not supporting Python 3 (there are fewer and fewer of those), in the future you will see the opposite, some project already announcing end dates for their Py2 support (IPython to give an example).
So, there's no benefit to Python 3, but we should all migrate to it anyways? You think Python 2.7 will die, but trust me as soon as the PSF abandons it, someone will swoop in and become the new defacto supporter. For many of us, stability is a feature, and the fact that 2.7 won't change in gratuitous ways is super attractive.
exactly. This is what i have always believed. just Google and Dropbox have too much py2 code to drop it or do a wholesale conversion.
Nothing is going to be EOLed. Its going to be business as usual and the python foundation will never agree to killing python 2 in the next decade.
the only way forward is through six ( https://pypi.python.org/pypi/six) or something like it. Its well worth building and funding a python 2 compatibility layer in python3... and then moving to py3 runtime.
im actually surprised that someone like Google is not throwing some funding towards building a compatibility layer.
So, there's no benefit to Python 3, but we should all migrate to it anyways? You think Python 2.7 will die, but trust me as soon as the PSF abandons it, someone will swoop in and become the new defacto supporter. For many of us, stability is a feature, and the fact that 2.7 won't change in gratuitous ways is super attractive.