Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 45

Thread: Python 3.4 Steps Closer With New Features

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,770

    Default Python 3.4 Steps Closer With New Features

    Phoronix: Python 3.4 Steps Closer With New Features

    The second alpha release of Python 3.4 is now available and with it comes a range of improvements over Python 3.3...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ1NzY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Umph. Hope it is at least keeping compatibility. I mean, new features and fixes are a good thing but in the past Python didn't seem to be too compatible among versions. Which sucks since quite a bunch of things rely on it (and not only on Gentoo).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adarion View Post
    Umph. Hope it is at least keeping compatibility. I mean, new features and fixes are a good thing but in the past Python didn't seem to be too compatible among versions. Which sucks since quite a bunch of things rely on it (and not only on Gentoo).
    Python kept backwards-compatibility up through 2.7. 3.0-3.3 had some breaks, but I think the 3.x releases have been backwards-compatible since 3.3.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,046

    Default Interfaces

    Python still doesn't have;
    * public/private/protected access modifiers.
    * Class interfaces, abstract classes, etc

    Python is great for small scripts, but I am not sure if its any good for big projects with services, repositories and multiple backends and pluggable modules.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    247

    Default

    Yeah, because python is a functional language.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Python still doesn't have;
    * public/private/protected access modifiers.
    It does have private methods and attributes, but they aren't strictly enforced (by design).

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    * Class interfaces, abstract classes, etc
    Yes it does. See, e.g. Abstract Base Classes

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Python is great for small scripts, but I am not sure if its any good for big projects with services, repositories and multiple backends and pluggable modules.
    You mean like some of the most popular web applications and frameworks?
    Last edited by TheBlackCat; 09-10-2013 at 05:57 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    It does have private methods and attributes, but they aren't strictly enforced (by design).
    > private def foo():
    SyntaxError: invalid syntax

    > def private foo():
    SyntaxError: invalid syntax

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    Yes it does. See, e.g. Abstract Base Classes
    That is weird, you don't have any interface keyword or abstract keyword.
    It is difficult to understand and not intuitive.
    It feels more like hacked on, than intelligently designed.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    You mean like some of the most popular web applications and frameworks?
    Cant be fun to code multiple database backends or pluggable authentication or such.

    Then it is much nicer to code in PHP, Java or C# which has real object-oriented programming.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prodigy_ View Post
    Yeah, because python is a functional language.
    It is a multi-paradigm language, so its functional, object-oriented and reflective.
    But the OO part seems tacky.

    Even PHP have better OO and PHP wasn't even originally designed with OOP in mind, it was plastered on in PHP 5.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    > private def foo():
    SyntaxError: invalid syntax

    > def private foo():
    SyntaxError: invalid syntax
    Code:
    >>> def _foo():
    ...    print 'hello world'
    ...
    >>> _foo()
    hello world
    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    That is weird, you don't have any interface keyword or abstract keyword.
    It is difficult to understand and not intuitive.
    It feels more like hacked on, than intelligently designed.
    In other words:
    "Python doesn't have ___"
    "Yes it does"
    "It uses a different syntax than I am used to so it doesn't count"

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Cant be fun to code multiple database backends or pluggable authentication or such.
    Are you kidding? Do you have any idea how many database and authentication backends there are for python, or how many are supported by major python web frameworks?

    Who am I kidding, of course you have no idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Then it is much nicer to code in PHP, Java or C# which has real object-oriented programming.
    Python has "real object-oriented programming". "different syntax" != "not real".

    But I am sure you know web frameworks and applications much better than Sourceforge, Google, DropBox, Mozilla, Instigram, Reddit, Opera, or Digg, just to name a few.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    Python has "real object-oriented programming". "different syntax" != "not real".
    Prefixing method names with underscore isn't OOP and doesn't make it private.
    It is just you pretending that it is private.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •