On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 20:48:15 -0700, rusi wrote: > On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:48:25 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 12:18:59 -0700, John Nagle wrote: >> >> > No, Python went through the usual design screwups. Look at how >> > painful the slow transition to Unicode was, from just "str" to >> > Unicode strings, ASCII strings, byte strings, byte arrays, 16 and 31 >> > bit character builds, and finally automatic switching between rune >> > widths. >> >> >> Are you suggesting that Guido van Rossum wasn't omniscient back in 1991 >> when he first released Python??? OH MY GOD!!! You ought to blog about >> this, let the world know!!!! > > You are making a strawman out of John's statements: > >> Python went through the usual design screwups. [screwup list which >> perhaps pinche John most] Each of those reflects a design error in the >> type system which had to be corrected. > > The reasonable interpretation of John's statements is that propriety and > even truth is a function of time: It was inappropriate for GvR to have > put in unicode in 1990. It was appropriate in 2008. And it was done. > You may call that being-human-not-God. I call that being real.
And I agree with you! But that's not what John wrote. John called it a design screw-up. His very first example was the slow transition to Unicode. Not "here's a choice that made sense at the time", but "screw- up". -- Steven -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
