On 8/13/06, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Talin wrote: > > Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> On 8/9/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> For the majority of Python developers it's probably the other way > >> around. It's been 15 years since I wrote C++, and unlike C, that > >> language has changed a lot since then... > >> > >> It would be a complete rewrite; I prefer doing a gradual > >> transmogrification of the current codebase into Py3k rather than > >> starting from scratch (read Joel Spolsky on why). > > > > BTW, Should this be added to PEP 3099? > > Yes, why not.
Although perhaps it makes more sense to add something positive to PEP 3000, e.g. Implementation Language ================== Python 3000 will be implemented in C, and the implementation will be derived as an evolution of the Python 2 code base. This reflects my views (which I share with Joel Spolsky) on the dangers of complete rewrites. Since Python 3000 as a language is a relatively mild improvement on Python 2, we can gain a lot by not attempting to reimplement the language from scratch. I am not against parallel from-scratch implementation efforts, but my own efforts will be directed at the language and implementation that I know best. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
