On Dec 3, 2007 4:26 PM, Russ P. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 3, 2:12 pm, "Chris Mellon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Dec 3, 2007 4:02 PM, Russ P. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 3, 1:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot > > > > about "being serious") about IT knows what Python is and who uses it. > > > > Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR > > > > port of it. Can't get much more "serious" (lol), isn't it ? > > > > > Not so. I know professional programmers and computer scientists with > > > PhDs who have barely heard of Python and who assumed it was something > > > roughly like Basic -- until I explained that it is a "serious" > > > language that can be used for serious work. Then there are the > > > managers ... who tend to prefer serious names. Sometimes they can see > > > past a joke of a name ... and sometimes they can't. > > > > The vast majority of languages in use today have "joke" names. > > Languages with "serious" names are pretty much limited to the > > humorless environments of military and government contracting. > > > > There's not a single competent manager out there who'll dismiss Python > > just because it's called Python. The fact that incompetent managers > > exists does not change that fact, They won't be able to create good > > software no matter what language they choose, so there's no particular > > reason to cater to them. > > > > Also, you yourself are starting to emit spikes on the trollmeter, as > > does anyone who blathers about how "serious" we need to be in order to > > ingrate ourselves with hypothetical gray faced bureaucrats. > > > Look what's going on here, folks. The OP *dared *to suggest that > perhaps the name of Python could be changed in the next major release. > I said it's a long shot, but I think its worth considering. And what > do I get in return. Some reasonable replies, but mostly people who > assert that the idea is absoutely absurd and completely without merit. > > You'd think the OP had suggested that God's name be changed to dog. > Open your minds and let in some fresh air, folks. The name of a snake > is not sacred ... for crying out loud! Try to think "outside the box" > for a few seconds if you can. Yes, it frightening at first, but you > can overcome the fear. >
I do think the idea is absolutely absurd and without merit. That doesn't mean that I think the current name is some sort of sacred cow (if I may mix metaphors). People who claim that everyone would agree with them if they'd only open their minds or think out of the box are worth more than a few points on the trollmeter. Consequentially, this will be (my) last post on the subject, although apparently I have already been trolled. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list