On May 28, 11:46 pm, Dave Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 28, 3:19 pm, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Kind of like how this year's program won't work on next year's > > > Python? > > > For somebody who has admitted to have only very rudimentary knowledge of > > python that's a pretty bold statement, don't you think? > > Everthing I know, I learned from Wikipedia. ;) > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_(programming_language)#Timeline_a... > > "Like Perl 6, Python 3.0 will break backward compatibility. There is > no requirement that Python 2.x code will run unmodified on Python 3.0. > There are basic changes such as changing the print statement into a > print function (so any use of the print statement will cause the > program to fail) ..."
Hi Dave, Why don't you use your own FT google group to explain why FT is sooooo much better than other languages (python included). Then you post __once__ that you started such a conversation, and that's it. I'm sure all smart developers will have a look and they will all follow you. The other ones (the ones, including me, who are interested in reading about python) will keep on having narrow minded conversations about their favorite snake-oriented language. Poor guys that we are, we won't even realize how superior you are, how great your language is, how faster FT is, etc... We will be jobless in no time, and soon you will have 90% of the language market and make tons of money. I wish I could be smart enough to realize this. Unfortunately, I'm just soooo stupid. So please don't steal my brain-cpu cycles, I need them for better purposes. Thanks for helping me -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list