Steve Holden wrote: > You are correct in suggesting that the library could be better organized > than it is, but I felt we would be better off deferring such change > until the emergence of Python 3.0, which is allowed to break backwards > compatibility. So, start working on your scheme now - PEP 3000 needs > contributions.
I fear that Python 3.0 becomes some kind of vaporware in the Python community that paralyzes all redesign efforts on the std-lib. The argument goes like this: one has to wait until the BDFL has made his syntax/feature/builtin decisions. It is not usefull to redesign a std-library of a language that becomes somehow deprecated - but the BDFL thinks that Python 3.0 is still py-in-the-sky. PEP 3000 seems to be nothing more than a summary of the BDFLs musings about Python warts and some wishfull but highly controversial features like type guards that would have a great overall impact on the std-lib. Regards, Kay -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
