On 29 Mar 2005 00:29:06 -0800, "El Pitonero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Christos TZOTZIOY Georgiou wrote: >> >> One of the previous related threads is this (long URL): >> >http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/messages/f7dea61a92f5e792,5ce65b041ee6e45a,dbf695317a6faa26,19284769722775d2,7599103bb19c7332,abc53bd83cf8f636,4e87b44745a69832,330c5eb638963459,e4c8d45fe5147867,5a184dac6131a61e?thread_id=84da7d3109e1ee14&mode=thread&noheader=1#doc_7599103bb19c7332 > >Another previous message on this issue: > >http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/1615d8b83cca5b20 > >Python's syntax surely is not clean enough for concise metaprogramming. >At any rate, I'd agree with Fernando's assessment: > >Fernando wrote: >> The real problem with Python is ... Python is >> going the C++ way: piling feature upon feature, adding bells >> and whistles while ignoring or damaging its core design. > >If the core design were better, many "new features" in Python could >have been rendered unnecessary. > Do you have specific recommendations that might benefit python 3000? What better "core design" features would have eliminated what "new features"? ;-) Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
