On 3/29/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > Watch out for the parochialism! I like Python as much as the next guy > > (probably more :-) but I'm sensitive to choosing the best solution. > > you better make that "good enough", or we'll be stuck with SF for an- > other hundred years.
Fair enough. I like "good enough" as a criterion; it's served me well in real life for many years, since it reduces the time I waste pondering decisions. Unlike language design issues, tool selection choices aren't forever. > > The language choice should only be used as an argument if all else is > > equal. > > since it's a lot easier to get Pythoneers to volunteer time to work on > (develop, hack, keep running, create add-ons for) a solution written in > Python, the criteria ought to be "the language choice is only irrelevant > if there's no Python solution that's good enough". > > it's also a marketing thing; if the developers don't want to eat Python > dogfood, why should anyone else do that ? Sure. There are plenty of reasons to prefer Python, making all else "not equal". I was just warning against knee-jerk parochialism, which I don't think will serve us well. There's Perl code in the Python source tree, and the only reason to get rid of it IMO should be if it no longer serves our purpose. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
