Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> writes: > Why would having PyPy as the reference implementation have made this design > decisions turn out better?
A fair amount of Python 2's design was influenced by what was convenient or efficient to implement in CPython. There's nothing wrong with that and it's a perfectly normal and sensible strategy. Anyone writing Python code in a serious way has to maintain some awareness of how CPython works, so CPython's influence finds its way into Python user programs too. With PyPy as the reference implementation, the designers may find they can take the language in cool new directions that were impossible with CPython, or alternatively, they might find that adding minor retrictions (that would count as "breaking more stuff") would give big advantages under PyPy that weren't significant in CPython. What kinds of stuff and is any of it a sure thing? Unknown. That's why the idea was: first get more experience with PyPy, then figure out how it should affect the language. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
