* David Robinow:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Alf P. Steinbach <al...@start.no> wrote:
PS: This was not unexpected. It was exactly why I earlier didn't even look
at CPython (umpteen bad experiences with *nix ports) but used ActivePython.
It's not a *nix port. It's multiplatform and it works fine.
Your "works fine" is in blatant contradiction with reality, as reported here.
As you've
been told before, ActivePython "is" cpython.
Thanks for that point of view, but ActivePython just works without any hassle,
while CPython does not.
As far as I'm concerned you can call the beast whatever you want, e.g.
"multiplatform". But don't expect me to use your terminology just to please you
and make it seem nicer than it is. I think that's an outrageous request, on the
same level of outrageousness as the denial of reality that you engaged in above.
That said -- which is all about your comments, not about Python -- I rather like
the 3.1.1 thing so far. It could do with a much better installer, the packaging,
which is what I tested now. But since 2.6 is a transitional ease-the-porting
version, 3.x is automatically a much more clean language, and it seems better.
Cheers & hth.,
- Alf
PS: Please don't mail me copies of your replies. This time it made me first
e-mail and then have to copy that for the in-group reply. It does fit in with
your denial of reality and insistence that others should use the terms that you
like the best, the non-thinking or trolling (not much difference in practice)
approach to dealing with things, but even if it fits so well please don't do it.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
