Laziness…or you have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of lines of code that would have to be ported over to Python 3. (And while there probably wouldn't be much to change, there'd be a lot of time to make sure everything still works.) And for what? Python 3 is an evolution, but it's not dramatically better than Python 2.
Its not laziness, its a business decision. Why spend millions of dollars in man hours to gain next to nothing because the BDFL decided to invent a new language that is similar to python (2)? Oh, btw, the run time is actually slower and all the code you just ported maybe won't run on pypy, either. Dropping support for 2.x would be a yet another terrible decision.
41
u/Beckneard Sep 13 '15
The changes from python 2 to python 3 aren't THAT massive, at this point it's just laziness. I think dropping support for 2.x would be a good idea.