The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

Re:The X.Org Server Is Abandonware? by vnlab on Monday October 26, 2020 @05:43AM (#24894351)

> Python 3 changed nothing.

Sorry, have you tried to maintain a C extension for both 2/3? Or a unicode heavy application?

This is a silly statement, there's a reason that major packages took a decade to migrate. There are thousands of little details that are incompatible.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The X.Org Server Is Abandonware? by sergeykish on Monday October 26, 2020 @06:40AM (#24894663)

From user perspective. Gains.

Nothing required big 2/3 change. Ruby and Go done it right — a series of small changes. Python 2.* had it right. The attitude of language developers was clearly stated in PEP 414 and 2to3 approach — no backward compatibility. That is nonsense, every python program had backward compatibility several minor versions deep.

Select one issue and work on it. Unicode:

    # python prev
    u"" # or from __future__ import unicode_literals
    b""

    # python next
    u""
    b"" # or from __past__ import binary_literals

Facts speak for itself, change was to big for users to overcome it, price was too high. I've lived through Ruby string changes, not a big deal.

Wayland transition is nothing like Python 2/3. It is big but mostly invisible, XWayland runs X11 applications, toolkits hide implementation details, no X.Org deprecation.

[ Parent | on HN ]