On 1/9/17 8:31 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Simon Lovell <[email protected]> wrote: >> Python Reviewed >> >> Having used a lot of languages a little bit and not finding satisfactory >> answers to these in some cases often asked questions, I thought I'd join >> this group to make a post on the virtues and otherwise of python. > I think this thread belongs on [email protected], where you'll > find plenty of people happy to discuss why Python is and/or shouldn't > be the way it is. I think this is the only reasonable response to this posting on this mailing list.
Simon: quoting from the Python-Ideas info page: "This list is to contain discussion of speculative language ideas for Python for possible inclusion into the language." Your comments, while interesting, don't make specific proposals for changes to Python. [email protected] is good for general discussion. If you do intend to make specific proposals, you'll have to put a lot more work into them. Proposals should be focused and specific; one thread with a dozen ideas makes discussion impossible. It helps to understand the language and its history. Many of your reactions to Python have been expressed many times before, so there are well-documented discussions and rationales for Python being the way it is. Doing some research beforehand can save you some work. Finally, backward compatibility is a serious consideration. Proposals containing new keywords, for example, are nearly impossible to get approved. Welcome to the community, --Ned.
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
