2 ms·
Drat. I do agree with the analysis you posted on your site [1] that it only will affect early-adopters/language geeks and is probably for the best for the pytho
by dschobel 17y ago
Drat. I do agree with the analysis you posted on your site [1] that it only will affect early-adopters/language geeks and is probably for the best for the python community at large. But two years is a darn long time in the technology world.
It looks like it will be up to the library/framework builders to keep the python hype/momentum going while the language maintainers are playing grown-up and being responsible.
[1] for everyone else's sake: http://jessenoller.com/2009/11/09/pep-3003-python-language-moratorium-accepted/ http://jessenoller.com/2009/11/09/pep-3003-python-language-m...
- jnoller 17y agoYes and no; I actually think a stronger focus on the standard lib and the interpreter is plenty of work to keep the hype running. It's been my personal bugbear to do a heck of a lot of cleanup in that space. For example, right now there's discussion about a futures library (ala Java's implementation) for inclusion. There's plenty of work to be done there to make sure some of our older batteries are cleaned up, new ones included, etc. Two years is a long time - but how much of that needs to go into the syntax rather than the standard library? What about more abstractions on top of threading/multiprocessing? An actor implementation? More web technology support? Python is more than the sum of it's implementation - and even that is fair game (see antoine's latest GIL work as an example).