Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I assumed the Java model was based on the C++ model because it seems > that everything in Java is based on C++, and they share the same > vocabulary. If I'm wrong - well, that means you considered another > language already.
I guess it's similar that way, however, C++ doesn't attempt any enforcement at all, it has naked pointers, etc. > Sure, Java might be a big improvement. But Python isn't Java. Rather > than just throwing in something that works, do the legwork to verify > that you're going to propose a best-of-breed solution. I don't think I've proposed anything so far. I've just been trying to answer some of the CPython cultists who claim that the concept is useless. I'd rather not think too carefully about Python changes of this depth until after PyPy is fully deployed. A lot of things that some folks seem to think are deeply ingrained in Python, are really just hacks that fell out of the C implementation. Python has evolved over time and it will continue to do so. > If something perfect is available, wouldn't you feel awful if Python > got saddled with something that wasn't perfected? Oh, heaven forbid that anything like that might ever happen in Python. </snark> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
