How many versions do I need? !!!

[pd2]

I have a new B+ and see that I have the following directories with Python.
python2.7
python3
python3.3
python3.4

What is all this spaghetti? Why would I need 4 versions and how do I clean this up without breaking something.
I only looked because I needed to install pytz and then when I ran a program that needed it pytz could not be found.
Thanks for any info.

[Paeryn]

You actually have 3 versions there, python3 will be a symlink to python3.4 more than likely (or it could be to python3.3).
You have both 2 and 3 because there are plenty of legacy Python2 programs out there that won't work under Python3, there were some major changes between Python2 and Python3.

I don't know why Python3.3 is installed, it isn't on mine. Unless you have an old setup (possibly Wheezy shipped with 3.3?) or you installed something that required it.

As to pytz not being found, which Python did you install it for and which Python are you trying to use it from?

[scruss]

Why would I need 4 versions and how do I clean this up without breaking something?

Exec summary: don't worry about it, and leave it alone. It doesn't take up much space and you could break things by meddling.

In their Infinite Wisdom, the Python developers decided to make:

1. Python 3 slightly but significantly incompatible with Python 2; and
2. Python 2 officially “expire” in the next few years.

Unfortunately, there's a tonne of code that works just fine in Python 2, and it's going to take work that no-one really wants to do to fix it.

So you need to keep Python 2 and Python 3 around for compatibility. Sometimes older libraries create old-version folders (I have a ‘python2.6’, for some reason) but they're not much to worry about.

[RDS]

I am yet to understand why Python 3 was not written to be backwards compatible!

[Paeryn]

Because they wanted to improve the language in ways that couldn't be done whilst remaining backwards compatible.

[stderr]

I am yet to understand why Python 3 was not written to be backwards compatible!

For the same reason they didn't with Perl 6, to drive you insane!

[TideMan]

Whereas Fortran IV code from the 1960s will work fine with the latest gfortran compiler.

[Danilk]

I am yet to understand why Python 3 was not written to be backwards compatible!

minor changes print() range() list(range())…

[Martin Frezman]

I'm surprised that they don't provide (or somebody doesn't write) a translator (i.e., a program to translate a Python 2 program into a Python 3 program).

I suspect it's not as trivial as one might hope it to be.

[gkreidl]

I am yet to understand why Python 3 was not written to be backwards compatible!

minor changes print() range() list(range())…

No, there's much more involved (which sometimes makes porting from 2 to 3 a real pain): https://docs.python.org/2/howto/pyporting.html

[DougieLawson]

It ALL gets fixed in 2 years 11 months 14 days from now
https://pythonclock.org/

Until it doesn't and that python2 retirement date gets moved out again..

[gkreidl]

It ALL gets fixed in 2 years 11 months 14 days from now
https://pythonclock.org/

Until it doesn't and that python2 retirement date gets moved out again..

There are lots of reasons for moving it again: http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2014/1/5/unicode-in-2-and-3/

And on the RPi Python3 is so much slower ...

[Danilk]

No, there's much more involved (which sometimes makes porting from 2 to 3 a real pain): https://docs.python.org/2/howto/pyporting.html

life is pain!

[kusti8]

I'm surprised that they don't provide (or somebody doesn't write) a translator (i.e., a program to translate a Python 2 program into a Python 3 program).

I suspect it's not as trivial as one might hope it to be.

The already do. It's called 2to3. Or you could also use six.

[Martin Frezman]

The already do. It's called 2to3. Or you could also use six.

OK - good to know.

The next step, then, is, of course, to build that functionality into the Python 3 interpreter, so that it can run either kind of script. Problem solved. On to the next.

[Paeryn]

The already do. It's called 2to3. Or you could also use six.

OK - good to know.

The next step, then, is, of course, to build that functionality into the Python 3 interpreter, so that it can run either kind of script. Problem solved. On to the next.

No, that won't happen (not unless you want to do it yourself). Python3 intentionally doesn't support the old style. 2to3 isn't a panacea either, AFIAK there are still cases it can't handle.

[Martin Frezman]

No, that won't happen (not unless you want to do it yourself). Python3 intentionally doesn't support the old style. 2to3 isn't a panacea either, AFIAK there are still cases it can't handle.

That was, actually, my point.

[Danilk]

Python3 intentionally doesn't support the old style

hmmm
my Qt4 prog works with 2&3

[Paeryn]

Python3 intentionally doesn't support the old style

hmmm
my Qt4 prog works with 2&3

If you are careful you can write Python code that works under both. Python2 can import from __future__ to get a few Python3 features and you can also wrap code with checks against which version you are running under.

[hippy]

I'm surprised that they don't provide (or somebody doesn't write) a translator (i.e., a program to translate a Python 2 program into a Python 3 program).

I suspect it's not as trivial as one might hope it to be.

It wasn't easy when I looked at doing that, even converting 'print' to 'print()' throws up problems and trying to figure out when '/' should become '//' can be tricky.

It is possible to automatically identify where they may be problems but not so easy to fix them.

[Martin Frezman]

Sounds like a job for TXL!

www.txl.ca

But my point is that assuming it is possible, it should then be the case that the P2 interpreter becomes part of the P3 interpreter. Sort of like how 32 bit Windows runs 16 bit applications (and, similarly, how 64 bit Windows runs 32 bit applications).

[Paeryn]

Sounds like a job for TXL!

http://www.txl.ca

But my point is that assuming it is possible, it should then be the case that the P2 interpreter becomes part of the P3 interpreter. Sort of like how 32 bit Windows runs 16 bit applications (and, similarly, how 64 bit Windows runs 32 bit applications).

Having them separate makes more sense, a Python2 program will never run Python3 code and vice versa. Then you have all the sub versions...

[Danilk]

If you are careful you can write Python code that works under both

im totally noob )))

[kusti8]

The point is that python 2 and 3 is more like C and C++, although with less drastic changes. Python3 was an effort to try and fix all the mistakes that were in Python2 and make it less quirky and more functional. Could they have made it backwards compatible? Sure. But that is a ton more work and also makes that their buggy Python2 version will forever be around. It was a big overhaul. I don't really see what the problem is though. I program in Python3, not Python2 and if there is some library that isn't in 3 I just move on. It also helps that Arch linux has python symlinked to Python3 not Python2 like most systems.

[hippy]

Python3 was an effort to try and fix all the mistakes that were in Python2 and make it less quirky and more functional.

Unfortunately it often seems to execute considerably more slowly -

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=172622#p1104397