Message: 5 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 07:37:46 +0200 From: Stefan Drees <[email protected]> To: Andrew Francis <[email protected]> Cc: Stefan Drees <[email protected]>, Christian Tismer <[email protected]>, The Stackless Python Mailing List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Stackless] Why No (O'Reilly) Stackless Python Book? Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>I remember around the 2004 Berlin Sprint having been approached by a >publisher to write a book about current Python. So I asked Christian and >Dinu to author it together, but our conclusion at that time was, that >the work might not be worth the effort. (Printed) books on the bleeding >edge were so fast outdated. Since books are now better spreadable and >updateable for readers of e-Versions, I guess it is time to reconsider ... Hi Stefan: >I remember around the 2004 Berlin Sprint having been approached by a publisher >to write a book about current Python. So I asked Christian and Dinu to author >it together, but our >conclusion at that time was, that the work might not be >worth the effort. (Printed) books on the bleeding edge were so fast outdated. >Since books are now better spreadable and >updateable >for readers of >e-Versions, I guess it is time to reconsider ... Well Stackless Python has been stable for a number of years now. Moreover, there is nearly *20* years of experience involving Stackless's concurrency model, in the form of stuff from the Bell Lab family of languages. I look at the channel based version of a sieve of eratosthenes written two decades ago (and I have written in Stackless) and am still awed. What is even more awesome is taking the same example and incorporating pickling .... Also I think another hedge against aging is illustrating computer concepts with Stackless .... Cheers, Andrew
_______________________________________________ Stackless mailing list [email protected] http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
