[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: The looming Python 3(000) monster



On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 10:47 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 12:35 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > 
> > I just don't get why any sane person, especially anyone familiar with 
> > computer languages, would ever want to give something that is not the 
> > same the same name.  Does anyone know how the developer(s) manage this 
> > themselves?  I have to think they are keeping multiple concurrent 
> > versions installed (and that that is the only reasonable approach).
> 
> I'm pretty certain that if you look at any language, they've all faced
> similar scenarios, major version upgrades that may in fact not be
> forward no backward compatible.  People have dealt with it and moved on.
> No language is perfect.

Never seen C/C++ break backward compatibility on a scale like Python 3.0
will.
And they are compiled, where the impact is 100 fold less than for
interpreted languages ...

I would personally strongly consider having 2.x and 3.0 parallel
installable ...

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]