gtaylor

Luckily, I think this is one of those cases where investing in this particular field will be good for humanity _and_ profitable.

Hopefully not $900 Epi Pen profitable, though...

Even if this is but one small step towards wider treatment, this is worth taking a moment to be happy and thankful for. You know that this patient is!

Not to say that this research isn't ethical or moral. More that we'll eventually benefit from this.

This may be a bleak way to look at things, but the money the rest of the world will start making with this in the future will ensure that we eventually come around. Money wins over morals and ethics much of the time.

I like Ask HN, but I am selective about which other threads I get too deep into the comments on. Many of the discussions on here break down into quibbles over wording or minor points. Or pointless, showboating pedantry.

When I do go comment diving, I'm looking for substance. Not grammar, spelling, or minor wording or terminology back-and-forth.

The reasons to upgrade are often dependent upon your usage case. To me, the Unicode improvements are reason enough on their own before you even get into the other great stuff (async work, type hinting, stdlib cleanup, pyc rework, etc).

asyncio is going to be a slow build, as the ecosystem starts unifying around it. But as that happens, we'll be much better off for it.

With numerous libraries phasing out support for 2.x in current or upcoming versions, I think we actually do have significant uptake.

As pointed out by others, those PyPi stats are super off. Better to look at what's going on out in the community and with the most popular packages (like Django).

Python 3 is not a fork. It is a major release. A continuation of the same language, by the same people, with very little change in the core concepts. A major release with some backward incompatibilities doesn't constitute a fork.

The previous version is being sunsetted, as is common for legacy software. By the time 2.7 is EOL'd, it will have enjoyed a decade of active development and maintenance. That's just one version of Python.

If there were a compelling enough argument for a fork, it would happen and a new name would be chosen. But alas, it makes very little sense for the wider world.

It's not difficult to write software that works with Python 2 and 3. It's just becoming less and less worth it, as evident by announcements like this Django 2.0 one. The scales have tipped towards Python 3.

It's a major release.

We'll just have to see. That's the beauty of this. Don't want to upgrade? Stick with Django 1.11, since you don't want or need new things. It's LTS, so you won't miss out on critical fixes.

> core base of users and please could they focus on them instead of the web people who are much more fickle and moving already.

Ahhh, I see what's going on now. You may be vastly underestimating the size of variety of the Python userbase. This is one of the absolute most popular languages on the planet. Your science subset is but one of many. And it's not even the biggest if we're talking sheer user counts.

Python must be steered for the good of the majority of the userbase. Not just for vegabook. The fact that you described them as "useless" to me just speaks to someone being impatient and dismissive of a ton of excellent work by the contributors. These changes weren't made just for the hell of it. Particularly the Unicode example that you gave above.

If you want help understanding the rationale behind some of these changes, feel free to ask here. Someone with more familiarity will chime in and help clear up the confusion or angst.

It's going to be more and more of a burden for the developers to maintain compatibility with a 7-year old version of Python.

I think this is smart and will help them focus on the road forward. Django 1.11 is an LTS release, so legacy stuff can stick with it and be just fine.

Things were a little bit hairy back in the 1.3 days, but they've done a ton of cleanup in modern times. I find the source much easier to follow these days. Many of the systems have been more clearly isolated to allow for replacement.

> I am also almost 100% certain that if scientific programmers leave Python, the language will stall, and the current 3.x pushers are dangerously looking a gift horse in the mouth.

This sounds like such similar sour grapes to the systemd escapades. Huge initial outroar as certain things happened, followed by a gradual diminishing, then [mostly] acceptance.

This is what is happening with Python 3 and a smaller, doom-and-gloom subset of the userbase. Most of us are thankful that Python is striving to improve, and that we continue to pay nothing to use it. The alarmists are far more noisy than those that are happily continuing to build stuff.

Python will remain massively used in the sciences. It's simple, easy to learn, expressive, and has an excellent ecosystem of modules (which now mostly work on Python 3).

I'm not seeing signs of these kinds of widespread issues out in the wild. The popularity of the language has continued to increase, and numerous warts and flaws were wiped out in Python 3.

That Unicode "cruft" is especially appreciated by the rest of the world that exists outside of the US. Python 2's approach to bytes and encoding is naive and horrible for 2017.

This sounds like a fork. Nothing need stop someone from forking and maintaining CPython 2.x. Open source is a do-ocracy.

But I doubt it'd be worth it. Python 3 is getting great traction and is a fundamentally better language.

It's an open source project with a million things to work on whenever the contributors can spare a few moments. Adobe has a full time paid staff to make progress on numerous fronts at any time.

I like and use Play Music, but find their recommendation engine to be less great. The channels work a bit differently, too.

Anecdotally, I find the Linux wifi stack to be less of a hassle than Mac's for decently supported hardware. I had all kinds of random wifi issues on my MBP. Had to disable and reenable the interface or reboot.

> I can't recall a time in the last 1-2 years when someone complained about it.

I don't like open office plans, but they're so common in the Bay Area that there's not much avoiding them. I don't want to work remote, and office configurations aren't the only thing I look for in a gig. So realistically, I'm probably going to be working in an open plan as long as I'm here.

It works and it's not a crippling thing to have to contend with, but not everyone is ideally suited for an open office plan. I think it disproportionately hurts people that have skills in certain things, wider responsibilities, or institutional knowledge that a number of others have to utilize. You can have the best organized, most complete documentation ever and this will still be an issue.

These supposedly run Linux very well, as another option.

Not ever saying a word in the office is just not realistic. You don't leave people out intentionally, but conversations happen organically sometimes. Maybe you're in the kitchen grabbing a poptart and start talking shop with someone who walks in.

There are tradeoffs inherent in every working situation. This is one that really bothered me. It doesn't bother everyone, though.

It's very new and still maturing. Pull requests and improvements welcome!

There is indeed a helm package, gitlab-ce.

Some of these Python libs call out to C for heavy lifting, which can be very performant.

FWIW, I really liked Angel List for finding smaller companies. I found their listings to be of high quality. Ended up taking a job across the country from Angel List.

On the hiring side, we seem to get inundated by recent grads regardless of where we post. LinkedIn and Indeed seemed like the worst offenders for us in previous gigs.

> Do none of those companies utilize chat?

Sure they do. But you're going to miss adhoc conversations that people in the same physical location have. Remote people aren't left out on purpose, but many times this chatter doesn't warrant saying "Hold on, let's not talk to each other's faces. Better do this on Slack.".

Source: Worked remote for about four years, really missed these kinds of random chatter.

Same for us at Reddit. Howdy, neighbor!

I can't speak for everyone, but I just don't feel like using it. I can't notice a difference. Not worth it.

Eh, as a PyCharm user I never see much of anything suggesting Java. JetBrains does a great job with these editors.