RE: Python 2.5
- From: Jamal Mazrui <empower@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:57:32 -0400 (EDT)
Different opinions are fine. Mine is based on developing Python
applications on Windows over the past couple years. The 2.5 version is
hardly legacy: 2.6 and 3.0 were released last Fall, and the overwhelming
amount of good teaching material available is for 2.5 (I'm not even aware
of an accessible 3.0 book).
It is true that py2exe is not for a complete beginner, but one of the
first things a Windows programmer wants to do is create a self-standing
executable, as can be done with other Windows languages. The problems
with py2exe are not a matter of the authors not complying: they are
some of the most sophisticated Pythonistas (e.g., Mark Hammond and
Thomas Heller), but
have not yet solved the issues with 2.6, MS C++ runtime libraries, and
manifest files. 3.0 does not work at all with wxPython -- the best way
of creating GUIs with Python.
I don't think Python 3.0 is fundamentally more object oriented than
previous versions. To be honest, I was disappointed that the changes were
not more sweeping since backward compatibility is broken. It would have
been great, for example, to have an alternative to the indentation
requirement (like Boo has added) or to drop the necessity of passing self
as the first parameter of every instance method!
Jamal
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009,
Sina Bahram wrote:
> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:23:49 -0400
> From: Sina Bahram <sbahram@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Python 2.5
>
> I think it's important not to urge legacy technologies for the sake of other
> individuals' not complying, for example the py2exe authors. There will
> always be such issues during upgrade paths, but urging others to wait,
> simply reduces the pressure to make such things move forward.
>
> I just can't imagine telling someone not to bother learning 3.0 because they
> might not require those concepts, especially since 3.0 involves some nice
> improvements in making python a more object oriented and further robust
> language.
>
> Also, I really don't think that py2exe is quote beginner stuff unquote, in
> that distribution seems to be the main name of the game for that one, and
> that comes far after the beginning to learn how to program stage.
>
> I absolutely urge folks, regardless of platform, if starting out with python
> to learn 3.0.
>
> Just a humble opinion.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Perry
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:51 PM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Python 2.5
>
>
>
> I guess that is for folks who still live their life in the Microsoft world.
> I have started drifting slowly away from that world for the first time so I
> will bow to your advice if I run python in windows I will make sure to stay
> with 2.5 for the time.
>
> Ken
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamal Mazrui
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:15 AM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Python 2.5
>
> Python 2.6 is compiled with Microsoft Visual C++ 2008, whereas 2.5 is
> compiled with 2003. This results in some incompatibilities with modules
> that are not pure Python. py2exe, for example, does not work well with
> 2.6. I'm on that list, and 2.6 has been a nightmare for folks.
>
> Jamal
>
> On Fri, 19
> Jun 2009, Ken Perry wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:33:54 -0400
> > From: Ken Perry <whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: Python 2.5
> >
> >
> > What incompatibility is there with 2.6? If you're talking beginner there
> is
> > no incompatibilities because they will not be using libraries that are
> > precompiled they will be using the base libraries and some that you can
> get
> > and compile and 2.6 works fine with almost all libraries that work for 2.4
> > and 2.5. Where does 2.6 become a problem when it's for a beginner. 3.0
> on
> > the other hand becomes a problem but that is a whole other ball game.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamal Mazrui
> > Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 10:31 AM
> > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: Python 2.5
> >
> > As I said, if you know what you are doing -- as you do -- go for it. A
> > beginning Python programmer would not be using the with statement or
> > care that a large sort is a bit faster in Python 3.0. The
> > incompatibilities, however, will trip them up.
> >
> > Jamal
> > -- Original Messages --
> > Jun 2009, Ken Perry wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:16:35 -0400
> > > From: Ken Perry <whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: Python 2.5
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This is not true. I agree that 2.5 is the most used right now but I
> > totally
> > > disagree that there are no real new features. The multiprocessing is a
> > big
> > > one and the with statement is another big one. What I do so that it
> don't
> > > interfere with other programs is install it with 2.5 they will run side
> by
> > > side all you do is install it and relink the python application with
> > > python2.5 Then when you want to run a python application in 2.6 you
> > either
> > > put #!/usr/bin/python2.6 in the top or you use python2.6 bla.py.
> > >
> > > Those are not the only two big changes either they are just the two
> > biggest
> > > that are making a difference in some of the things I am writing. I will
> > > also point out that I have found it runs a small bit faster on a bubble
> > sort
> > > running 100,000 random numbers through the loop. They are the same run
> of
> > > numbers for each test and it consistently comes out a small bit faster
> > than
> > > 2.5. It comes out even faster if you use some of the advanced looping
> > > features.
> > >
> > > Also the garbage collector is a bit smarter which makes for a much
> better
> > > time for all.
> > >
> > > Ken
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamal Mazrui
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 6:18 AM
> > > To: ProgrammingBlind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Python 2.5
> > >
> > > To any beginning Python programmers, this is the version I recommend
> using
> > > rather than 2.6 or 3.x. If you know what you are doing and have a
> > > specific need to use the later versions, then go for it. Otherwise, you
> > > will probably encounter compatibility problems with popular 3rd party
> > > Python libraries, including py2exe -- the one that lets you create
> > > independent executables on Windows. In my opinion, there is almost no
> > > functionality that one loses by using 2.5 at this time. 2.6 and 3.x are
> > > mainly a matter of syntax changes and re-organization of built-in
> modules
> > > so far.
> > >
> > > This is not a disapproval of the direction the Python language is
> > > going -- just a reality check on what is working well at present, so
> > > beginners can minimize headaches.
> > >
> > > Jamal
> > >
> > > __________
> > > View the list's information and change your settings at
> > > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> > >
> > > __________
> > > View the list's information and change your settings at
> > > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> > >
> > __________
> > View the list's information and change your settings at
> > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> >
> > __________
> > View the list's information and change your settings at
> > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> >
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
Other related posts:
