On Sunday 07 April 2002 09:38 pm, François Pinard wrote: > I use Python on a few systems and flavours, and Python versions are not the > same on all machines. At places, people ask me to limit myself to 1.5.2. > At home, I have 2.2, but 2.0 is currently the common denominator for the > set of machines on which I do my own projects (I physically travel between > sites). For one, I have no real problem aiming 1.5.2 or 2.0 instead of > 2.2, when projects or teams require it. Despite I much enjoy most of the > new features, I still have to be careful about various development > contexts. I also use 2.0 as the lowest common denominator. Its hard to avoid 1.5.2 (because Red Hat has been shipping with 1.5.x). I can't complain about the differences in Python versions. For the most part my experience has been hassle free. PHP version issues have been more troublesome to me than Python version issues. > The current pace of change does not look unreasonable to me. I wonder if > the perception would not improve, if there was a bit more documentation > or publicity about what users should do about version inter-operability. > If users understand what they choose, they will less likely feel changes > as imposed to them. Maybe! :-) There are some who think preserving familiarity between versions is way more important than incremental improvement. In my opinion, sticking to that very idea is a good way to kill and stagnate a language. I believe that maintaing and improving the language *usually* is more important than maintaining consistency between versions. That being said, going overboard with changes isn't good either. I think documenting these changes would be a step in the right direction. My two cents. Good day, ~Mark
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