Iwan van der Kleyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
to be determine the way foreward for Python: more features, increased complexity, less dynamism. Lots of syntax crud, without addressing the
As a student of human nature, I'm _really_ curious as to how one could possibly read the key document: http://www.python.org/peps/pep-3000.html and think in consequence of "more features, increased complexity".
Also, you keep talking about "the core python team" on the basis, it would appear, of reading one document by Guido. Have you bothered doing a MINIMUM of homework, such as, looking at http://www.amk.ca/diary/archives/cat_python.html and specifically AMK's entry for September 30? I'm trying to understand whether you completely missed doing the most elementary amount of background searching before venting on the group, or if you did find and read the obvious documents and somehow STILL manage to completely ignore their contents or read them as saying exactly the opposite of what they _do_ say...
Optimistic documents about a cleaner and smaller language (and an improved stdlib) are all well and good, but if you look what has actually been happening to Python over the last few years, then the OP's worries don't seem so far-fetched. "More features, increased complexity, less dynamism" pretty much sums it up.
Guido's posts about optional static typing seem to suggest that this development will continue in the same vein. (He may just be putting his thoughts on paper, but it's the BDFL, so what is one supposed to think?)
I for one will NOT welcome our new static typing overlords. ;-)
-- Hans Nowak http://zephyrfalcon.org/
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
