Delaney, Timothy (Tim) wrote: > It is without a doubt though incumbent on anyone proposing new > *features* to have a solid understanding of what they are proposing, > what it would affect, any backwards incompatibilities, and whether it > fits into the python philosophy (import this).
Sure. However, I wasn't just thinking about feature suggestions, but about times when people are asking about the best algorithm to use or why Python doesn't have something they used to rely upon in another language. > And this is the crux of it - the majority of such proposals come from > people who apparently haven't actually used python that much, and are > trying to impose things from other languages onto it. The problem you get, is that the only people who are ever likely to need to ask questions, are those who don't fully understand Python, by definition. Often the answer they get is unintuitive to anyone not familiar with Python, but occasionally you are additionally treated as if you should have known and that thinking otherwise is a bit stupid, which is a bit unfair. In some cases, the question is quite valid, but the Python community has ossified around their own particular approach, which is not necessarily optimal but seems to be enough for all concerned. (eg. the proliferation of web frameworks that holds Python back as a platform in that area.) -- Ben Sizer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
