On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 01:58:48PM +0100, Dinu Gherman wrote: > All I can say is that I'm writing an app that I want to be > cross-platform and that Python does not allow it to be just > that, while Google gives you 17400 hits if you look for > "python cross-platform". Now, this is also some kind of > *truth* if only one of a mismatch between reality and wish- > ful thinking... I'm sure I agree, but I don't see the value in dropping everything to write a function so Python can be that much more cross-platform. (That's just me, though.) Python wouldn't *be* as cross-platform as it is now if not for a group of people who weren't satisfied with it, and improved on it. And a lot of those people were not Guido or even of the current PythonLabs team. I've never really believed in the 'true cross-platform nature' of Python, mostly because I know it can't *really* be true. Most of my scripts are not portably to non-UNIX platforms, due to the use of sockets, pipes, and hardcoded filepaths (/usr/...). Even if I did, I can hardly agree that because there is no portable way (if any at all) to find out howmany diskspace is free, it isn't cross-platform. Just *because* it lacks that function makes it more cross-platform: platforms might not have the concept of 'free space' :) -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4