> It's not at all clear that Fredrik likes it, but he doesn't > participate in Python development any more so we may never know :-(. > From his blog: > > > ...so someone I've never heard of added a major syntactic feature > > to Python 2.4, using a syntax that Guido doesn't really > > like. sorry, guys, but I liked Python better when the core > > language was controlled by a single designer with a strong > > intuition. the current > > design-by-arguing-until-nobody-cares-anymore-committee just don't > > understand what made Python's design so damn good (as the "[new > > syntax] is no worse than [existing operator] meaning [something > > when used with a given type]" comment clearly shows). sigh. good > > thing nobody can force me to use decorators (or update to 2.4, for > > that matter). time to finish my own interpreter, perhaps. or at > > least start using a fresh one. > > Jeremy I saw that blog entry, and was surprised, because he really did seem to like it back then. It's clear that Fredrik (a) forgot that I showed it to him, and (b) misunderstood (or worse, deliberately misconstrued) how it came checked in. I'm disappointed. --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