Guido van Rossum wrote: > 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.
I had already added something to PEP 3099, but if you like that approach better, I'll add that to PEP 3000. Georg _______________________________________________ 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
