Future of the Python Linux Distribution

[Michael Hudson]

m.faassen at vet.uu.nl (Martijn Faassen) writes:

> Andrew M. Kuchling <akuchlin at mems-exchange.org> wrote:
> > Glyph Lefkowitz writes:
> [snip]
> >>2) is OCaML-Python free?
> 
> > I'm not sure what the licence is, but vaguely recall it's the same as
> > Python's.  Could be wrong...
> 
> I think you're wrong. It's something like "here's the source but it's 
> copyright John Skaller as Jon Skaller wants to find a way to make 
> enough money to eat". At least last I checked.

That's changed; it's LGPLed now.

[schnupp]
> Those languages will probably be interesting. I've been toying with some
> language ideas for a while now (since before I discovered Python). Then
> I discovered Python and it was so much like that language (but a lot
> better) in some respects that I stopped thinking about it for a while.
> Now I'm thinking about it again occasionally. I've learned a lot from
> Python's pragmaticism, focus on readable syntax (just enough sugar to
> make it read nicely, but not more), and flexibility traded off for
> speed. I was concentrating way too much on the 'this needs to be 
> optimizable to heck' aspect of language design, and I now realize that's
> not so important. Maybe in a couple of years I'll start implementing
> it seriously; maybe not. 
> 
> I bet there are more people in this newsgroup toying
> with such ideas; 

Oh my, yes.  Implementation safely distant here though...

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  well, take it from an old hand: the only reason it would be easier
  to program in C is that you can't easily express complex  problems
  in C, so you don't.                   -- Erik Naggum, comp.lang.lisp