On 2018-09-20 18:56, James Lu wrote:
JS’ decisions are made by a body known as TC39, a fairly/very small
group of JS implementers.
— I’m not saying this should be Python’s governance model, just to
keep JS’ in mind.

To my mind, there is one very big reason we should be cautious about adopting JS language-design policies, namely, that they have led to a very, very poorly designed language. No doubt a good deal of that is baggage from early stages in which JS had a poor to nonexistent language design governance model. Nonetheless, the failure of JS to fix its numerous fundamental flaws, and especially the rapid feature churn in recent years, suggests to me that their model should be viewed with skepticism.

Brendan Barnwell
"Do not follow where the path may lead.  Go, instead, where there is no
path, and leave a trail."
   --author unknown
Python-ideas mailing list
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to