David, I am curious why you are undertaking the effort to take a language already decades old and showing signs of being a tad rusty into a language that suggests further oxidation. More seriously, I am interested in what this can gain and the intended user base. I studied Rust for a while and it has it's features but have had no opportunity to use it. Is it expected to make a faster version of Python, or enable better connections to libraries and so on? What I mean is that if you are planning on making it pass all tests for python functionality, are you also adding unique features or ... ? My preference is to have names that fully include what they are about. So the name "python" would be left intact rather than mangled, even if the name itself happens to be totally meaningless. So may I suggest something like """rustic-python""" ?
-----Original Message----- From: David J W <ward.dav...@gmail.com> To: python-list@python.org Sent: Thu, Jun 23, 2022 10:29 am Subject: Re: "CPython" >> Let's say they reimplement "reference python" CPython in Rust. What is >> better? Change the "reference python" CPython name to RPython, for >> example, or let it as CPython? >The C implementation would still be called CPython, and the new >implementation might be called RPython, or RustyPython, or whatever. >The names are independent of which one is currently blessed as the >reference implementation. I am at the pre planning stages of making a Rust implementation of the Python virtual machine and to avoid ambiguity I've been working with Rython as the name. I tried looking for a Monty Python themed name but the good ones seem to be taken. Otherwise as for a timeline, solo I figure it's going to take me a couple years to get something that actually passes cpython's python unit-tests. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
