Is there no end to Python?

[Steve Holden]

kpp9c wrote:
>>> This is good thing because I can ignore what I don't need.
> 
> 
> I am finding that this is really not true for me. I find that if i use
> other folks code, collaborate, or get help from other folks i still
> have to know all the new constructs that i don't often use, and i
> really struggle with iterators and generators and some of the newer
> things and folks seem to have fallen in love with ridiculously complex
> list comprehensions. (i'll admit i love the list comprehensions too,
> but too a point)
> 
> Don't get me wrong, i LOVE Python, but since 2.2 or so the language has
> started to get some feature creep and is starting to evolve
> exponentially fast and while all that pre 2.2 code is really readable
> still, i see some stuff now that really really hurts my brain. We see
> less silly lambdas than we used to, and Python is more powerful than
> ever, but i think there has been a cost too. Python has become harder
> to read and *MUCH* harder to learn all of a sudden.
> 
> Personally i would like to see the core Python language evolve more
> slowly and see work on packages, modules and DOCS!!
> 
> but i am sure that is very much a minority opinion. I found the
> language additions of 2.3 and 2.4 really hard to absorb.
> 
> flame away... 

No need for flames. I'll content myself with pointing out that most 
1.5.2 programs will run unchanged in 2.5, so the backwards compatibility 
picture is very good. Nobody makes you use the new features!

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden       +44 150 684 7255  +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd                 www.holdenweb.com
Love me, love my blog         holdenweb.blogspot.com