Re:Python 3 in 2016
by EvanPlaice on Thursday February 18, 2016 @01:13PM
(#11127866)
Like I said. Python3 works for regular python users.
What if I want to distribute a package to an audience that doesn't have a strong Python background.
What would otherwise be a simple 'pip install' just turned into a complex multi-step process to install a new version, update PATH, and use virtualenv to avoid conflicts with the default install used internally by the OS.
These all seem like 'simple' fixes to a regular Python user but they set a huge barrier-of-entry for others.
'Just use [insert python specific fix]' is a UX failure for a language that emphasizes usability.
To reiterate. Python3 is ready for regular python users/devs. Not so much for the rest who consume python applications.
What if I want to distribute a package to an audience that doesn't have a strong Python background.
What would otherwise be a simple 'pip install' just turned into a complex multi-step process to install a new version, update PATH, and use virtualenv to avoid conflicts with the default install used internally by the OS.
These all seem like 'simple' fixes to a regular Python user but they set a huge barrier-of-entry for others.
'Just use [insert python specific fix]' is a UX failure for a language that emphasizes usability.
To reiterate. Python3 is ready for regular python users/devs. Not so much for the rest who consume python applications.