Vega Strike Forums

I have two questions:
Does VS use python 2 or the newer python 3 (I know it most likely uses v2, but lets see).

If you answer python 2, then will VS use python 3 in the near future?

Python 3 is still beta and the recommended course of action from the Dictator for Life is to use 2.6 to get legacy apps ready for version 3 as there quite a few back compatibility breaks we currently use 2.5 but there is still lots of stuff that was written with 2.2 and needs rewriting with all the changes since then taken into consideration we really need a complete review of all the Python code.

Enjoy the Choice

If I am not mistaken, python 3 is no longer beta. It is currently 3.1rc1, and hopefully full soon enough . I plan on learning both c/c++ and python, as I've heard its pretty fast to learn python. In that case, should I learn the newer python 3 (I know they are similar but I've read some stuff changes), so update me on this

Python is very readable and fairly easy to learn the basics such as the indentation and major functions syntax it's when you encounter a full blown app that it gets complicated ie. all the those import statements that begin most modules Python's version of include these libraries.As for the differences between the various versions that is fairly well documented in the official documentation for each new version and 2.6 introduces some new things that are not backward compatible but ease the way forward to version 3.0 which means that there is a awful lot of code in most Linux distro's that will break without a rewrite so i don't think that any of the main distros are ready for 3.0 and won't be till sometime next year at the earliest i believe as only a few have adopted 2.6 ATM.

Enjoy the Choice

MC707 wrote: I plan on learning both c/c++ and python, as I've heard its pretty fast to learn python. In that case, should I learn the newer python 3 (I know they are similar but I've read some stuff changes), so update me on this

I'd learn 2.6, as it incorporates many of the changes in 3. That way you can work with current code, and still be ready for when more people change over.

Having taken the learning path of Python to C to C++, I heartily recommend it. Learn the OO principals of Python, and C++'s shouldn't be an issue. Having to manage your resources (i.e., memory, closing files, etc) is not a problem after learning C - you'll love new and delete after working with malloc. After C, C++ really seemed to me like structs on steroids.

Thanks for the back up Iblis learning those OO principles is where i'm stuck as i first learned Fortran back in the dawn ages of computing followed by various Assembly level systems so OO is still hard for me to get properly to much experience at that low level where you have to keep track of everything yourself.

Enjoy the Choice

thanks iblis, I will take that in account always good to have support and advice from a pro

loki1950 wrote:Thanks for the back up Iblis learning those OO principles is where i'm stuck as i first learned Fortran back in the dawn ages of computing followed by various Assembly level systems so OO is still hard for me to get properly to much experience at that low level where you have to keep track of everything yourself.

Enjoy the Choice

No problem, figured he'd want multiple opinions, even if they agreed.

OO gave me some trouble at first, but like I said before, I manage to just think of it as structures with functions embedded to handle the data. After spending way too much time working with OO in C (yes, it's possible, if not fun), using a language like Python or C++ with all the syntactic sugar is rather nice. (No pointers to functions just to have a class method, etc)

And inheritance, if properly planned and implemented, can save a lot of time. Greatly reduces maintenance, when you want to add functionality without breaking the whole system.

Granted, it can be a nightmare if it's *not* properly planned and implemented, but that's pretty much true with all methods of programming.

Now assembly... that still gives me a headache.

Now assembly... that still gives me a headache.

There was no other way at the time And C had not been created yet or if it had was still for internal use at Bell labs Though the IBM360's cpu architecture is very similar to x86 chips current CPU's have more recourse to manage remember wishing for a few more registers than the 16 available then there was the PDP8/e class project write an OS for the wee thing(wee at that time).

Enjoy the Choice

OMG assembly there's something that can have you beating your head on a wall for months.

lol anyway python 2.6 is definitely a good start into programing, that or java

Here's a little programing humor/question of sorts
"2 b OR NOT 2b = "

OMG assembly there's something that can have you beating your head on a wall for months.

Yes it can as there is no layer of abstraction when you are dealing with naked machine code your tool box is limited to the CPU's instruction set and your knowledge of algorithms to do what you want so you are always seeking new ones and with the limited memory space at the time saving instructions so that you had room for both the data and the program the result was very tight code but also lots of un-maintainable code that only the original coder understood enough to modify.The so-called millennium bug just one example those apps became mission critical so every effort was made to keep using them when a complete rewrite was what was needed.That is what happened finally when there was no other way forward.

Enjoy the Choice

assembly code...I haven't programmed in that since 1989.

2b OR NOT 2B = true

Not many have as there are so many other ways of getting the job done now with the basic fact that memory is no longer a constraint so high-level abstraction languages abound some just more effective than others for a particular task.

Enjoy the Choice