Alex Shinn scripsit: > Hmmm... that's upsetting. Python 3 is a notorious dead-end language.
That's a premature judgment (and rather Google-centric). Since Python 3.0 was DOA, the intended five-year transition plan to "Python 3 by default" ended only a month ago (Python 3.1 was released in June 2009). There was never any intention to move old applications, only that enough libraries and infrastructure would be dual-mode to make new application development in Python 3 practical. That's *almost* the case today, from what I understand, though there are some show-stoppers for particular kinds of applications. For the nitty-gritty, see <http://python-notes.curiousefficiency.org/en/latest/python3/questions_and_answers.html>. In any case, the overall problems with the Python transition don't affect the validity of specific solutions to specific problems. I'm considering writing a derivative of SRFI 13 that works on bytevectors. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan co...@ccil.org Any sufficiently-complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad-hoc, informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common Lisp. --Greenspun's Tenth Rule of Programming (rules 1-9 are unknown) _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users