On 08:51 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:19 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a
temptation to make more "just this once" incompatible changes. Of
course,
you've promised these changes won't be made, and *this* set of design
mistakes will be with us forever. It would be nice if there were a
way for
evolution to continue without another reboot of the world.
Since one of your favorite themes is that your team is too small, I
would like to reuse that idea. If we had as many Python core
developers as Sun and IBM have working on Java, we could most likely
have introduced all Python 3.0 features gradually, with compiler flags
and __future__ imports to support different versions. But despite
being a bit bigger than Twisted, we're still severely constrained by
resources.
Ah, the dangers of over-editing. I originally had a whole paragraph
about how I understood that the Python dev team was also resource
constrained, but I deleted it for brevity. Now you see why my posts are
so long! :)
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
