Using Alex Martelli's post as an excuse to mouth off: > ... people who won't use Python > because they don't perceive it as stable enough for > their needs ... Personally, I'd take the stability argument as cover for "I've already got a favorite language", with a good chance that language is VBScript, because Perl/TCL/Java-heads would pick on something else. A number of the loudmouths on c.l.py have outlooks noticebly tinged by paranoia. The others remind me of those who perch for hours around the water-cooler, talking about how they're "working their butts off". Other than a gap right after 1.5.2, Python has done very well with backwards compatibility. There is perhaps too much noise about new features: you guys get (understandably) excited; the water-cooler guys get delicious morsels to feed their delusional tendencies. I care not one whit what numbering scheme is used, as long as it approximates being well-ordered <wink>. I do think PLabs should take the good end of the stick, and be the ones to apply the "stable" label. To maintain credibility in this perception-based framework, that probably means being a wee bit behind. (I rather like Alex's idea of a stable track and an experimental track where new features can settle down for awhile.) -- Gordon http://www.mcmillan-inc.com/
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