> Guido, I'm not sure that you are always aware what > people actually like about Python and what they dislike. > I have heared such complaints from so many people, > that I think there are reasonably many who don't share > your judgement. Tough. People used to like it because they trusted my judgement. Maybe I should stop listening to others. :-) Seriously, the community is large enough that we can't expect everybody to like the same things. There are reasonably many who still do share my judgement. > Personally, I belong to the more conservatives, too. > (Stunned? No, really, I like the minimum, most orthogonal > set of features, since I'm running low on brain cells). > > > Don't take me as negative. This has to be said, once: > > I like the new generators very much. They > have a lot of elegance and power. > I am absolutely amazed by the solution to > the type/class dichotomy, and I'm completely > excited about the metaclass stuff. Great! No surprise that you, always the mathematician, like the most brain-exploding features. :-) And note the contradiction, which you share with everybody else: you don't want new features, except the three that you absolutely need to have. And you see nothing wrong with this contradiction. > Much more valuable memorizing than list comprehensions, > booleans and hopefully no new formatting syntax. For many people it's just the other way around though. > All in all Python is evolving good. Maybe we could > slow a little down, please? I'm trying. I'm really trying. Please give me some credit. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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