Booleans, integer division, backwards compatibility; where is Python going?

[Steve Holden]

"Paul Rubin" <phr-n2002a at nightsong.com> wrote in message
news:7xadshtrj1.fsf at ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> writes:
> > No, that's "stagnant"...
> >
> > Stable is also a good adjective for it, since most of the older
> > code still runs unchanged, and Python from ten years ago is
> > still very recognizable to new coders today.
>
> Stable doesn't just mean old scripts run without change in new
> interpreters.  It also means new scripts usually run without change in
> old interpreters.  That's what keeps breaking in Python.
>
Please stop promoting your misunderstanding about backwards compatibility.
(OK, here you call it "stability", but I'm not aware of any major language
which hasn't introduced new features).

If all old interpreters must run all new scripts then the only possible
solution is indeed the time machine reputed to be in Guido's possession.

regards
 Steve