Oren Tirosh wrote:

>  Python 3 will most probably make big changes in the internal
>  implementation and the C API. Perhaps it will even be generated from
>  PyPy.

Don't you think the current Python 3 "visions" becomes rather pointless 
with the raise of PyPy and interpreter extensions that are developed 
polymorphically? If the distinction between a user defined package and
a language extension becomes more or less irrelevant who needs a 
language design committee for it's control? If someone takes the Python
core in order to implement static typing it might be happen and run in a 
separate object space. But than, I'm almost sure, it won't be an 
ill-defined concept like "optional static typing" but Hindley-Milnor ( 
or a generalization ) which restricts dynamicity but enables type safety 
and static control otherwise.

The idea of forking a language with a new release and thereby 
deevaluating older code seems somewhat archaic to me. Or the other way
round: archaic materials and media like papyrus and scripture enabled
communication across centurys changing slightly evolutionary and 
continously. Form this point of view PL development is still in a state 
of modernistic, youthfull irresponsibility.

>  I don't think keeping the common subset will really stand in the way
>  of making big improvements. The proposed 3.x changes that break it
>  seem more like nitpicking to me than significant improvements.

So it seems.

Kay


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@[...].org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-dev-ml%40activestate.c
om