Oren Tirosh wrote: > Python 3 will most probably make big changes in the internal > implementation and the C API. Perhaps it will even be generated from > PyPy.
Don't you think the current Python 3 "visions" becomes rather pointless with the raise of PyPy and interpreter extensions that are developed polymorphically? If the distinction between a user defined package and a language extension becomes more or less irrelevant who needs a language design committee for it's control? If someone takes the Python core in order to implement static typing it might be happen and run in a separate object space. But than, I'm almost sure, it won't be an ill-defined concept like "optional static typing" but Hindley-Milnor ( or a generalization ) which restricts dynamicity but enables type safety and static control otherwise. The idea of forking a language with a new release and thereby deevaluating older code seems somewhat archaic to me. Or the other way round: archaic materials and media like papyrus and scripture enabled communication across centurys changing slightly evolutionary and continously. Form this point of view PL development is still in a state of modernistic, youthfull irresponsibility. > I don't think keeping the common subset will really stand in the way > of making big improvements. The proposed 3.x changes that break it > seem more like nitpicking to me than significant improvements. So it seems. Kay _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
