Home Original page

[Python-ideas] Is it Python 3 yet?

eryk sun eryksun at gmail.com
Thu Jan 26 18:25:59 EST 2017 
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26 January 2017 at 22:32, M.-A. Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
>> On 26.01.2017 23:09, Random832 wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017, at 11:21, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>> On a similar note, I always get caught out by the fact that the
>>>> Windows default download is the 32-bit version. Are we not yet at a
>>>> point where a sufficient majority of users have 64-bit machines, and
>>>> 32-bit should be seen as a "specialist" choice?
>>>
>>> I'm actually surprised it doesn't detect it, especially since it does
>>> detect Windows.
>>>
>>> (I bet fewer people have supported 32-bit windows versions than have
>>> Windows XP.)
>>
>> I think you have to differentiate a bit more between having a
>> 64-bit OS and running 64-bit applications.
>>
>> Many applications on Windows are still 32-bit applications and
>> unless you process large amounts of data, a 32-bit Python
>> system is well worth using. In some cases, it's even needed,
>> e.g. if you have to use an extension which links to a 32-bit
>> library.
>
> I agree that there are use cases for a 32-bit Python. But for the
> *average* user, I'd argue in favour of a 64-bit build as the default
> download.

Preferring the 64-bit version would be a friendlier experience for
novices in general nowadays. I've had to explain WOW64 file-system
redirection [1] and registry redirection [2] too many times to people
who are using 32-bit Python on 64-bit Windows. I've seen people waste
over a day on this silly problem. They can't imagine that Windows is
basically lying to them.

[1]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa384187
[2]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa384232
More information about the Python-ideas mailing list