On May 18, 11:02 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/18/2011 5:24 AM, lkcl wrote:
>
> There seem to be two somewhat separate requirement issues: the
> interpreter binary and the language version.
yes. [with the startling possibility of compiling the entire pyjs
compiler into javascript and executing
On 5/18/2011 9:42 AM, lkcl wrote:
he's got a good point, terry. breaking backwards-compatibility was a
completely mad and incomprehensible decision.
I see that I should take everything you (or Harris) say with a big grain
of salt;-). You just gave me a lecture about the impossibility of do
On 5/18/2011 5:24 AM, lkcl wrote:
There seem to be two somewhat separate requirement issues: the
interpreter binary and the language version.
a) at the moment a http://python.org 2.N interpreter is required to
actually run the translator. if you use http://python.org 2.5 or 2.6
you do not
On May 17, 5:38 pm, harrismh777 wrote:
> is recompiled everything still works... not so in Python. The fact that
> Python is free to morph gleely from PEP to PEP without responsibility or
> accountability with the user base is what may kill Python, unless the
> Python community gets a grip on thi
On May 18, 10:24 am, lkcl wrote:
> > > otherwise please - really: just saying "give me support for python
> > > 3.x or else" is ...
>
> > And I did not say that.
>
> yeah i know - i'm sorry: it just, with a little bit of "twisting",
> could be construed as implying that.
in case it wasn't cl
On May 18, 6:29 am, harrismh777 wrote:
> Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> > No, because I think you are exaggerating. That said, I think core
> > Python is pretty close to 'complete' and I would not mind further syntax
> > freezes like the one for 3.2.
>
> I am exaggerating only to the extent that someone
On May 18, 2:33 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/17/2011 12:07 PM, lkcl wrote:
>
> > On May 4, 7:37 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >> On 5/4/2011 10:06 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> >>> pyjamasis a suite of projects, including a python-to-javascript
> >>> compiler
> >> As you well know, there
harrismh777 wrote:
> If there is another major jump like 2.x --> 3.x in the future, Python
> will die. I hope you guys are aware of this. The user base might accept
> this thing once, but they're not going do it again...
The differences between major version releases of Python are far, far
less
On 5/17/2011 12:07 PM, lkcl wrote:
On May 4, 7:37 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 5/4/2011 10:06 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
pyjamasis a suite of projects, including a python-to-javascript
compiler
As you well know, there is no such thing as 'python' when it comes to
compiling actual
On May 4, 7:37 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/4/2011 10:06 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>
> > after a long delay thepyjamasproject -http://pyjs.org- has begun the
> > 0.8 series of releases, beginning with alpha1:
>
> >https://sourceforge.net/projects/pyjamas/files/pyjamas/0.8/
>
> >pyja
10 matches
Mail list logo
