I take your point, but I have a few counterarguments:
1. Python 3.4 was released 7 years after 3.0. That's a very long time.
2. Assuming you're referring to the async features (none of the other stuff is really momentous), I can understand that for framework devs. It's really not a big deal for most users though, and because of the GIL, it's not as if they'll suddenly reap the benefits of parallelism. All it really means is nicer algorithm expressions and event loops.
3. There's no technical reason the new stuff couldn't have been added to Python 2. The roadblocks are manpower and politics.
4. Even if we stipulate async/await/asyncio are huge, busted Unicode support, 7 years of development, and breaking compatibility with everything is just a terrible tradeoff.
There's just no way this was a good idea, and Python devs could earn a lot of credibility back if they just said "oops". But there's no chance of that.
1. Python 3.4 was released 7 years after 3.0. That's a very long time.
2. Assuming you're referring to the async features (none of the other stuff is really momentous), I can understand that for framework devs. It's really not a big deal for most users though, and because of the GIL, it's not as if they'll suddenly reap the benefits of parallelism. All it really means is nicer algorithm expressions and event loops.
3. There's no technical reason the new stuff couldn't have been added to Python 2. The roadblocks are manpower and politics.
4. Even if we stipulate async/await/asyncio are huge, busted Unicode support, 7 years of development, and breaking compatibility with everything is just a terrible tradeoff.
There's just no way this was a good idea, and Python devs could earn a lot of credibility back if they just said "oops". But there's no chance of that.