programming with Python 3000 in mind

[Paul Boddie]

Kay Schluehr wrote:
> Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> > beliavsky at aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > The current beta version of Python is 2.5 . How can a Python programmer
> > > minimize the number of changes that will be needed to run his code in
> > > Python 3000?
> >
> > by ignoring it, until it exists.
>
> And why not ignoring it, when it comes to exist?

The risk of Python 3000 being ignored or marginalised may increase in
direct proportion to the amount of exotic new stuff introduced upon its
release, mostly because people have a large amount of code that may not
work with an extensively modified language, library and runtime
(although the latter is only a remote possibility), and because
newcomers may not see Python 3000 as significantly interesting to adopt
in preference to other languages. This observation, which I'm sure I've
stated before, seems to have influenced (perhaps coincidentally)
various pronouncements about how conservative Python 3000 will be, at
least when compared to the expectations of the python-3000 mailing list
where various participants seem obsessed with reenacting 20th century
Types-SIG mailing list discussions and reproducing works with varying
degrees of similarity to the conclusions of that old activity:

http://www.python.org/community/sigs/retired/types-sig/

Note that links to the Types-SIG archives are broken on python.org, but
the archives are viewable via ASPN:

http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Browse/Plain/types-sig/

Ultimately, and to the disappointment of a few people, Python 3000's
benefits may very well seem incremental, if only to avoid fracturing
the community.

Paul