> We don't really know yet what Python 4 will look like, but we can be pretty sure that the transition from Python 3 to Python 4 will be a lot smoother
Doesn't compute.
You can't say you don't know anything about Python4 and immediately follow up with suggestions on how to program for it.
And if you really want to be consistent, at least:
if (python2):
// python 2
else if (python3):
// python 3
else:
raise "I have no idea what I'm doing"
At any rate, given the time lapse between Python releases and how catastrophic version migrations have been so far, it's safe to say that by the time Python 4 comes out (if ever), we will all have long retired from development.
My understanding is that the consensus is that Python 3 was the last time backwards incompatible changes would be made to the language. The author's point is that this makes Python 2 a special case, so you should make the default behaviour the Python 3 behaviour.
It's worse than that. If python 4 is not 100% backwards compatible with python 3, there's no reason to think the problems will be where python 3 is different from python 2. In fact, they will almost certainly be someplace else.
But long before we switch to python 4, we should stop trying to be backwards compatible with python 2.
Doesn't compute.
You can't say you don't know anything about Python4 and immediately follow up with suggestions on how to program for it.
And if you really want to be consistent, at least:
At any rate, given the time lapse between Python releases and how catastrophic version migrations have been so far, it's safe to say that by the time Python 4 comes out (if ever), we will all have long retired from development.