In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois?= Pinard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Sunnan]
[...] for Pythons ideal of having one canonical, explicit way to program.
No doubt it once was true, but I guess this ideal has been abandoned a few years ago.
My honest feeling is that it would be a mis-representation of Python, assertng today that this is still one of the Python's ideals.
Mind providing evidence rather than simply citing your feelings? Yes, there's certainly redundancy in Python right now, but a large portion of that will go away in Python 3.0. So where's the abandonment of the ideal?
Mind providing evidence rather than citing your opinions? I don't see any evidence that Python 3.0 will adopt Turing-machine-like canonical algorithms, and anything more complex is (at least from a theoretical point of view) merely syntactic sugar.
regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 703 861 4237 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ Python Web Programming http://pydish.holdenweb.com/
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
