Prev: Getting the name of the file that imported current module
Next: VICIOUS Enemy Insurgents kill 34 US soldiers after 9 hrs attack - Bellies ripped open and numerous injured - call for TRUE PATRIOTS . The deep undercover spies mislead the public on the facts
From: Terry Reedy on 4 Jul 2010 19:14
From: Tim Chase on 4 Jul 2010 19:51 I think it's the same venting of frustration that caused veteran VB6 developers to start calling VB.Net "Visual Fred" -- the language was too different and too non-backwards-compatible. The 2to3 tools are better (partly due to the less drastic language changes compared to the Fred'ification of VB) than the VB6->Fred conversion tools. I'd also agree that Py3 comes closer to the language ideals that Py2.x aspired to be, but Py2.x was held back by the fairly strict moratorium on the introduction of backwards incompatible changes. The language changes also introduce frustrations when searching for example code: what was "Python" code examples now may or may not now work in Py3 or Py2 (and more importantly, may not have a caveat regarding which interpreter to use). Finally, the slow transformation of the vast volume of existing Python libraries adds a bit of irritant to the masses. There was some dialog on the Django mailing list a while back about Py3 transitions, but it's still pretty distant on the roadmap. I've often wondered if changing the name of the language (such as "Adder", "Served", "Dwarf" or "Fawlty" for the Britcom fans in the crowd) would have mitigated some of the more vituperative slurs on what became Py3, designating a shared legacy without the expectation of 100% backwards-compatibility. -tkc
From: Roy Smith on 4 Jul 2010 20:05 In article <mailman.238.1278287528.1673.python-list(a)python.org>, Tim Chase <python.list(a)tim.thechases.com> wrote: > I've often wondered if changing the name of the language (such as > "Adder", "Served", "Dwarf" or "Fawlty" for the Britcom fans in > the crowd) would have mitigated some of the more vituperative > slurs on what became Py3, designating a shared legacy without the > expectation of 100% backwards-compatibility. Maybe it should have been "Python five, no, THREE!"
From: Chris Rebert on 4 Jul 2010 20:21 On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Roy Smith <roy(a)panix.com> wrote: > In article <mailman.238.1278287528.1673.python-list(a)python.org>, > Â Tim Chase <python.list(a)tim.thechases.com> wrote: >> I've often wondered if changing the name of the language (such as >> "Adder", "Served", "Dwarf" or "Fawlty" for the Britcom fans in >> the crowd) would have mitigated some of the more vituperative >> slurs on what became Py3, designating a shared legacy without the >> expectation of 100% backwards-compatibility. > > Maybe it should have been "Python five, no, THREE!" +1 QOTW Cheers, Chris
From: Ben Finney on 4 Jul 2010 20:38
Roy Smith <roy(a)panix.com> writes: > Maybe it should have been "Python five, no, THREE!" +1 QOTW -- \ “Our products just aren't engineered for security.” —Brian | `\ Valentine, senior vice-president of Microsoft Windows | _o__) development, 2002 | Ben Finney |