On the other hand, taking backwards compatibility so seriously is a big part of the massive success of Python

__mharrison__ 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I would argue that the libraries, and specifically NumPy, are the reason Python is still in the picture today.

It will be interesting to see, moving forward, what languages survive. A 15% perf increase seems nice, until you realize that you get a 10x increase porting to Rust (and the AI does it for you).

Maybe library use/popularity is somewhat related to backwards compatibility.

Disclaimer: I teach Python for a living.

▲

kelvinjps 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Python it's a language that really good libraries for different domains. like web: django/flask AI numpy pytorch and more. All the ecosystem for scripting and being already installed in most linux distros and on macs. For GUI it has really good bindings for the major frameworks QT,GTK.

▲

punnerud 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And PyTorch, and Pandas, and, and…

	▲	__mharrison__ 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Built and or inspired by NumPy...

▲

B1FF_PSUVM 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> you get a 10x increase porting to Rust (and the AI does it for you)

So, you keep reading/writing Python and push a button to get binary executables through whatever hoops are best today ?

(I haven't seen the "fits your brain" tagline in the recent past ...)

▲

pansa2 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>> Python 2->3 transition

> taking backwards compatibility so seriously

Python’s backward compatibility story still isn’t great compared to things like the Go 1.x compatibility promise, and languages with formal specs like JS and C.

The Python devs still make breaking changes, they’ve just learned not to update the major version number when they do so.

	▲	BarryMilo 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Indeed, Python's version format is semver but it's just aesthetics, they remove stuff in most (every?) minor version. Just yesterday I wasted hours trying to figure out a bug before realizing my colleague hadn't read the patch notes.

▲

kccqzy 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Python does not take backwards compatibility seriously. 2 to 3 is a big compatibility break. But things like `map(None, seq1, seq2)` also broke; such deliberate compatibility break is motivated by no more than aesthetic purity.

▲

IshKebab 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Python does not take backwards compatibility very seriously at all. Take a look at all the deprecated APIs.

I would say it's probably worth it to clean up all the junk that Python has accumulated... But it's definitely not very high up the list of languages in terms of backwards compatibility. In fact I'm struggling to think of other languages that are worse. Typescript probably? Certainly Go, C++ and Rust are significantly better.