On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:41:38 -0700, Rick Johnson wrote: > I personally know of few major software developers, who whilst > "shopping" for a scripting language for their API, wanted to integrate > Python because of it's clean syntax and auto-encapsulation, but they > where forced to choose *another* language because of all the headaches > that backwards incompatibility of Python 3000 would induce in the users > of the API.
Oh Really? I call bullshit. Name names. Name projects. If they are "shopping" for a scripting language, that means they don't have one yet. Which means their users have no existing scripts that need to be ported from Python 2 to 3. Whatever language is chosen, whether it is Ruby, Lua, Python 3 or something else, its all equally as new. -- Steven -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
