The article comments with respect to Python: "What is surprising is that several factors might have argued against a break-out year for Python: Two incompatibl

The article comments with respect to Python: "What is surprising is that several factors might have argued against a break-out year for Python: Two incompatible versions of the language and the uncertain fate of the Unladen Swallow project." The two "incompatible" versions of Python, presumably Python 2 and Python 3, is really an indication of the strength and foresight of the Python developers and users. Python 3 has new features, new libraries, and is missing some of the cruft of Python 2. I see this a sign of vibrant growth and long term viability, not of weakness. The article did not mention the PyPy project, python in python targeting performance on a par or better than CPython. It's Python 2 compatible at the moment, and a lovely piece of work. There will be a webcast Stanford talk by Armin Ringo, one of the developers, on the PyPy system on March 2, 4:15PM Pacific. http://ee380.stanford.edu http://ee380.stanford.edu. And, frankly, I do not see how the "uncertain fate of the Unladen Swallow project" has anything to do with the acceptance of Python.