Steve Menard wrote:
> Keep in mind that Ruby and Python are close enough in style, that any
> improvements those guys make will also benifit Jython.
This is perhaps true in the long run, in the sense that it may make it
easier for someone to implement Jython because those guys will make the
JVM mo
"Walter S. Leipold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> John Roth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> I've had a couple of inquiries about Jython support
>> in PyFIT, and I've had to say that it simply isn't
>> supported. The latest point release requires Python
>> 2.3, and 2.
John Roth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I've had a couple of inquiries about Jython support
> in PyFIT, and I've had to say that it simply isn't
> supported. The latest point release requires Python
> 2.3, and 2.4 will be required in the next year or so.
>
> John Roth
> Python FIT
Just last mon
Ray wrote:
>
> So, what is your main concern here that 2.1 doesn't address? Because if
> your concern is that you're using a dead thing as your environment,
> it's rising from the dead. But if your concern is that you want to use
> features in Python 2.4 in Jython, might as well look for other
>
Ray wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>Is Jython development dead or has it just seemed that way for over a
>>year?. The jython.org website has a recent new appearance (but no new
>>content) and there is some message traffic on the developer site at
>>Sourceforge. However nothing has been rele
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is Jython development dead or has it just seemed that way for over a
> year?. The jython.org website has a recent new appearance (but no new
> content) and there is some message traffic on the developer site at
> Sourceforge. However nothing has been released for over a
