On Jul 3, 6:24 pm, George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 3, 5:49 pm, Mensanator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jul 3, 2:52 pm, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Worthless to you, worthwhile to me. > > > The OP's opinion is the only one that matters. > > I bet the OP doesn't know (or care) what gmpy is.
But he'll care if he tries to use something specific to 2.6 and it fails and he doesn't know why. > > > What do you suppose > > is the percentage of posts on this newsgroup by those using 3.0? > > Taking into account 2.6 too (we're not talking about only 3.0 here), > probably not much less than those who even know what is gmpy, let > alone dismiss a beta Python release because their obscure pet module > is not available yet. That was just an example. When you consider ALL the pet modules like PIL, Numpy, Win32, etc., that's a lot, isn't it. > You will probably sound less negative if you refrain from projecting > your own very specialized needs to those of the average pythonista. Funny how you don't complain when Mr. Reedy projects HIS specialized needs to the average pythonista. I was just trying to be helpful (I admit I often sound negative when I'm not trying to be). > > George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
