A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-December/083992.html below:

[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final

[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 final [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0 finalBill Janssen janssen at parc.com
Sat Dec 6 04:22:18 CET 2008
Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org> wrote:

> Allow me to paraphrase glyph (with whom I'm in complete agreement, for what
> it's worth): many newbies will be disappointed by Python if they start with
> Python 3.0 and discover that most of the cool possibilities they had heard
> about are 'being worked on' and not quite ready. I don't doubt that 3.0 will
> be easier for the new programmer to learn, but I do not believe the average
> "Oh, I heard about Python, let's learn it" person should be pointed to 3.0
> right now. They should be encouraged to learn 2.6 -- or even 2.5.

I think that's right.

I was asked this question today, and it comes up (to me) fairly often at
PARC.  I usually suggest using the Python version that's standard for
the user's platform, if they use OS X or Linux (and most do), which is
typically 2.5 (for OS X Leopard), and 2.4 (for Linux -- may be out of date).
For Windows users, I suggest the latest release (2.6).

Bill
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4