What's missing from python?

[Peter Hickman]

Paul Rubin wrote:
> Python advertises a "batteries included" approach to the library which
> means it's supposed to include most of the stuff that users need,
> instead of making them download the stuff from random places.  

The 'batteries included' stuff is more a distribution / packaging issue 
than the standard library. At least coming from Tcl where we have a 
'batteries included' distribution including all sorts of nice things. 
However this does not mean that they are part of the standard library.

Tcl works find without an XML parser, but the 'batteries included' 
distribution has an XML parser which makes the distribution much more 
convenient.

> Python aims to be competitive with other languages and implementations
> including (e.g.) Java, which come with large libraries.  Unless it
> wants to retreat from aiming for the big time, it needs to also have
> thorough library coverage, even if that means more work.

Simple feature / library count as a measure of progress is flawed. Big 
time need not equate with bloat, besides Perl has a massive library of 
modules (CPAN) but they are not part of the standard library and this 
has not held Perl back.

We need to recognize the divide between language features and a basic 
distribution. A 'batteries included' distribution of Python, a la Tcl, 
which includes a selection of useful libraries is a good idea but there 
is no need to make it part of the standard library.

I want my Python in a Nutshell to be a single volume not an encyclopedia.