Thoughts on some stdlib modules

[Kay Schluehr]

Steve Holden wrote:

> You are correct in suggesting that the library could be better
organized
> than it is, but I felt we would be better off deferring such change
> until the emergence of Python 3.0, which is allowed to break
backwards
> compatibility. So, start working on your scheme now - PEP 3000 needs
> contributions.

I fear that Python 3.0 becomes some kind of vaporware in the Python
community that paralyzes all redesign efforts on the std-lib. The
argument goes like this: one has to wait until the BDFL has made his
syntax/feature/builtin decisions. It is not usefull to redesign a
std-library of a language that becomes somehow deprecated - but the
BDFL thinks that Python 3.0 is still py-in-the-sky. PEP 3000 seems to
be nothing more than a summary of the BDFLs musings about Python warts
and some wishfull but highly controversial features like type guards
that would have a great overall impact on the std-lib. 

Regards,
Kay