Istvan Albert wrote:
Doug Holton wrote:
the syntax of boo is indeed virtually identical to python.
All that boo does is borrows a few syntactical constructs from python. Calling it virtually identical is *very* misleading.
The syntax is indeed virtually identical to python. You are yet another person who has trolled before. See your obvious trolling reply here, for example:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/messages/c57cf0e48827f3de,a750c109b8ee57c3,cf89205a5e93051e,cfb1c7453e1f3c07,58a2dedd1059783e,8a1ee82cc328d023,7a51cdc9ffecbc72,38304f35cb42bb63,fc5e4ae1cbae0248,2de118caa7010b30?thread_id=5a7018d37b7bf4b8&mode=thread&noheader=1&q=boo#doc_a750c109b8ee57c3
Do you have financial conflict of interest too like Fredrik? Or is it just a psychological issue? I have no stake in python or any other language changing or not changing. You guys need to accept change rather than fear it.
Regardless of the merits of Boo, this is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.boo. The language may *look* like Python, but its inner workings are nothing like Python, as several people have correctly pointed out now. (Just like Java's syntax may look like C or C++ in some areas, but the languages are nowhere near alike.) Pointing out the difference is not trolling.
-- Hans Nowak http://zephyrfalcon.org/
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
