On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:00 PM, harrismh777 wrote:
> Andrew Berg wrote:
>>
>> AFAICT, there are three reasons to learn Python 2:
>
> ... there is a fourth reason.
>
> The linux distro you are using currently was customized with python 2.x
>
> I ran into this problem this week in fact... on my H
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:08 AM, SigmundV wrote:
> To the OP I'd say: learn Python through 3.2. It's the best way
> forward, for the sake of yourself and others. The only way more
> modules can become 3k compatible is if more people use 3k.
I skipped 3.2 and went straight to 3.3a0 from hg, but th
I'm using 2.7.1, because that's what my Ubuntu 11.04 bundles (python --
version reports 2.7.1+ though, no idea what the + means). On the other
hand, Ubuntu provides 3.2 packages via apt-get, so I'm in the process
of migrating to 3k. I really like the focus on laziness in 3k (don't
know if 'focus' i
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 01:00:35 -0500, harrismh777 wrote:
> So, be careful. I have had to separate *all* of my python installs on
> *every* one of my systems for this similar reason. The bottom line is if
> the distro ships with 2.6 (minus the idle) chances are that the
> interpreter is there *not*
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:00 PM, harrismh777 wrote:
> Andrew Berg wrote:
>>
>> AFAICT, there are three reasons to learn Python 2:
>
> ... there is a fourth reason.
>
> The linux distro you are using currently was customized with python 2.x
>
> I ran into this problem this week in fact... on my H
Andrew Berg wrote:
AFAICT, there are three reasons to learn Python 2:
... there is a fourth reason.
The linux distro you are using currently was customized with python 2.x
I ran into this problem this week in fact... on my HP g6 ubuntu notebook
running 10.04 lucid. It ships with the 2.6.5
Terry Reedy wrote:
A couple of years ago, users were people who were already programming
with 2.x. That is changing now.
... big time !
:)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 2011.06.09 12:18 PM, hisan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Please let me know which one is GOOD whether Python 2.6 OR 3.2.
> Please let me know the difference between them.
> Please give some refernce site or books to know the difference
I'm just a beginner, but AFAICT, there are three reasons to learn Pyt
On 6/9/2011 11:41 PM, Kyle T. Jones wrote:
Library support.
I urge people who use 2.x only for library support to let library
authors that they would have preferred a 3.x compatible library. I have
library authors say "Why port when none of my users have asked for a port?"
A couple of year
John Gordon wrote:
In <9037ef5f-53c5-42c6-ac5d-8f942df6c...@x38g2000pri.googlegroups.com> hisan
writes:
Hi All,
Please let me know which one is GOOD whether Python 2.6 OR 3.2.
Please let me know the difference between them.
Please give some refernce site or books to know the difference
I
If your dependencies are satisfiable with 3.2, you're better off with 3.2.
If not, use 2.7, or consider porting the dependencies yourself (assuming
those dependencies have code available).
Both 2.x and 3.x are good, but 3.x is clearly the way forward.
3.x has some annoyances corrected: more cent
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:18 AM, hisan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Please let me know which one is GOOD whether Python 2.6 OR 3.2.
As a side point, you should probably use 2.7 rather than 2.6. With
regard to 2.x versus 3.x, Corey already posted a link to an excellent
article.
Chris Angelico
--
http://
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/09/2011 01:18 PM, hisan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Please let me know which one is GOOD whether Python 2.6 OR 3.2.
> Please let me know the difference between them.
> Please give some refernce site or books to know the difference
http://wiki.python.o
In <9037ef5f-53c5-42c6-ac5d-8f942df6c...@x38g2000pri.googlegroups.com> hisan
writes:
> Hi All,
> Please let me know which one is GOOD whether Python 2.6 OR 3.2.
> Please let me know the difference between them.
> Please give some refernce site or books to know the difference
If you're starting
14 matches
Mail list logo
