Python Gotcha's?

[Bryan]

Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Bryan wrote:
> > Python 3(K) likes to use the same '.py' file extension as its
> > incompatible predecessors,
>
> And so it should.

We disagree. Not surprising in a "gotcha's" thread.

> > and in some/many/most *nix implementations,
> > it likes to install in the same place.
>
> I won't speak for Unixes, but that is certainly not the case with Linux.
> Each Python version gets its own location:

Yes, that was just silly of me to write that. All I want is a new
general convention for the most-likely-to-work invocation that won't
break with the change: "#!/usr/bin/env python" for Python 2 versus,
for example, "#!/usr/bin/env python3". Of course that's not an issue
of where python is installed, just a recommended naming convention.

> I don't intent to be rude, but anyone who isn't a complete newbie to
> programming but is surprised to the point of "gotcha" by version
> compatibilities simply hasn't been paying attention.

My perspective is simply different from yours. I'm not the one who
installs python on most of the boxes where I work or play. There's
little consistency, so I love conventions that usually work. I'd like
to advocate for Python 3, but the default install on Windows
commandeers the '.py' extension and breaks stuff that currently works.

Here's a discussion of the issue from late 2008. Amusingly, one of the
arguments for not changing the file extension was that Python 2 would
be gone in a few years.
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t647251-running-python-2-and-python-3-on-the-same-machine.html

-Bryan