I can’t imagine what effect this update will have on the host of applications using Python as a scripting language. I’m sure the fact that it is “intentionally backwards incompatible” makes a lot of people nervous since if any application (Houdini, Maya, Blender, XSI, TopMod, etc.) move to the new python, lots of peoples scripts may be rendered useless. So there are only a few options that I see:

1. An application can use Python 2.6 for a long time to come, not doing themselves any favors by staying with an ever older (and eventually unsupported) version.
2. An application can support both until 2.6 fades away.
3. Each application or a third party can branch off to make a supported Python 2.6-compatible version and everyone will start using that instead.
4. People will realize that they rather stay with 2.6 and 3.0 will die off.
5. An application can jump onto the Python 3.0 bandwagon, kill lots of scripts, but everyone will be better in the long run since we’ll have a better Python to use (plus, scripts can be fixed).

I’m for number 5.

1. Dread Knight Says:
   December 4th, 2008 at 8:04 pm

   #5 ftw!

2. Jason Says:
   December 5th, 2008 at 6:29 pm

   according to the http://docs.python.org/3.0/whatsnew/3.0.html there is a “2to3″ conversion/update script. that’s cool.. does anybody know if there is a “0to3″ or “0to2″ script? something that would essentially do the work for me? ;o)

   also, i read off of http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/04/python_3point0_release/ that 3.0 is about 10% slower.

   here’s a thought, along my adventure getting Nvidia’s gelato to work with blender i learned that multiple versions of python could be installed at the same time. i wonder if this would be the case with python 3.0? if so, could there still be “backwards compatibility” by having the scripts that don’t work in 3.0 use an older python install?

   and finally, python seems to be very closely integrated inside Houdini… “hython” etc. so, i’m curious, what will it take for sesi to move to 3.0?

   peace & 42

3. geneome Says:
   December 6th, 2008 at 9:48 pm

   Cool! Didn’t catch the conversion script. I think it will be a big deal for HOM to get to 3.0 since they’ll need to mess with it’s internal workings I gather (mainly hou). It’s still at 2.5.2 after all, so I’m very curious about what direction they’ll head. I doubt they’ll answer that question on the forums unless they already have it nailed down. Maybe someone (me?) will have the wherewithal to ask . I wouldn’t be surprised if they had an extra build at some point (like the VC7 and VC8 32-bit flavors).

4. Lewis C Says:
   January 15th, 2009 at 6:25 am

   surely python could use an “engine” parameter at the start of scripts to determine the versioning its a simple hack really but would be great for backwards compatibility full stop, I realise the language needs updating but people should be given choice to change rather than forced Tienanmen square style with the students obviously replaced with scripts not dead programmers lol also this would allow for the revival of older scripts without sacrificing more than a few instructions

5. am Says:
   January 27th, 2009 at 10:44 am

   I’m for nr 4. but I do realize it’s not gonna happen