"Lawrence Oluyede" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > - I know what you meant to say but the paragraph about pythonicness > and the security model seems a little "fuzzy" to me.
I agree that this paragraph is weak and recommend that it be rewritten. In particular, I think the 'pythonic*' words should go, especially if you expect this document to be read by anyone other than dedicated pythonistas. I would start with something like "It is my goal that my thesis work be incorporated in some future version of the Python distribution. This has two constraints. First, changes to the core must not slow down normal operation. Second, visible changes must not violate the spirit and style of Python that make it a distinctive language." This alludes to the fact that your proposal discusses two highly overlapping yet separate projects: write a thesis that gains you a PhD degree; and produce an accepted patch set that give Python a useful security capability it does not now have. They have to be thought of as somewhat separate because you have two sets of 'overseers' and approvers: your thesis advisor and committee for the first; and Guido and other Python developers for the second. I think your thesis should currently be your first priority. Your current paragraph implied to me that you would not follow a promising line of research if you could not see how to make it 'pythonic'. If I were on your thesis committee, I think that would bother me ;-). In any case, I wish you the best with a double project that is obviously not a 'gimme'. Terry Jan Reedy (PhD, though not on any thesis committees) _______________________________________________ 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
