Guido at Google

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Gary Herron wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> 
>> Greg Stein wrote:
[...]
>>> provided a LOT of support to a large number of open source
>>> organizations.
>>
>> I hope that you invest some time to _organize_ the Open Source Projects.
>>
>> Starting with Python and it's project-structure (e.g. build-process) 
>> and documentation (e.g. ensuring standard-terminology is kept, like 
>> "class")
>>
>> e.g.: where can I find an UML diagramm of the Python Object Model?
>>
>> Even Ruby has one:
>>
>> http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/TheRubyObjectModel.png
[...]

>> And finally:
>>
>> If Mr. van Rossum is now at Google, and Python is essentially a Mr. 
>> van Rossum based product, then most possibly the evolution-speed of 
>> Python will decrease even more (Google will implement things needed by 
>> Google - van Rossum will follow, so simple).
>>
>> I mean, when will this language finally become a _really_ fully 
>> Object-Oriented one, with a clean reflective Meta-Model?
>>
>> Thus I can see Python pass this this _simple_ evaluation (which it 
>> does not pass in its current implementation):
>>
>> http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/python.html
>>
>> -
>>
>> I have around one year to await. 
>
> You don't appear to understand Open Source very well.

I understand some of the several (partly contrary) meanings of "Open 
Source".

> Python is the way it is because we, the community, *like* it that way. 
> It evolves in directions that we (all) decide it is to evolve. Guido is 
> our leader in this because we trust him and *choose* to follow his lead. 
> If you want something changed you don't wait and you don't whine, you 
> join the community with a reasoned argument for why your idea would make 
> it a better language in *our* eyes.
> 
> So how about it... What's your complaint, 

As expressed above, I am afraid about pythons evolution-speed and futher 
  evolution in general.

a) Missing clear and concise documentation, e.g. of Python Object Model, 
like UML diagramm:

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/TheRubyObjectModel.png

b) Leadership (Board/Leader) should engourage change suggestions and 
analytical feedback, whilst accepting "analyst-role" in addition to 
"implementors-roles" (_both_ are contributions! This should be 
communicated by the Board/Leader to the Communicty):

[EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f5cd74aa26617f17

c) I mean, when will python become _really_ fully Object-Oriented, with 
a clean reflective Meta-Model? Thus it will pass this simple evaluation:

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/python.html

> what's your solution, 

http://lazaridis.com/efficiency/textual.html
http://lazaridis.com/efficiency/process.html

[alpha status, comments via email or contact-form are welcome]

> and why should we listen?

Cause this would increase the evolution-speed of python.

This would contribute to its success.

> Gary Herron

.

-- 
http://lazaridis.com