Python 3.0 unfit for serious work?

[Jay Tee]

Hi,

Paul, thanks for this, I didn't realize the scope of the situation.  I
agree with your assessment to the extent that I understand what the
whole python 3.0 thing is about.

Let's see if I can scare up something I wrote about ten years ago on a
now-dead language that I really wanted to use (wound up sticking with
python instead because "it was supported" ;-)

=======================
to figure out how to work things.  The fact that there are three (or
four depending if you count Linz V4) different Oberon System
implementations, and several different compilers, and even four or
five separate dialects of Oberon with none of them appearing to be
really "official", gives the impression of a fragmented, directionless
development effort, and a probability bordering on 1.0000 that
whatever you try to do will be incompatible with all but a small
subset of what's available (unless you stick to writing small programs
like in the books.)  It does not matter if you tell people that this
is not so; something has to clearly stand out as being THE STANDARD
STUFF and all the other stuff as INTERESTING BUT NONTHREATENING SIDE
PROJECTS.  The STANDARD STUFF must include a sufficient number of
=========================

Oberon is really really cool, seriously, ... but nobody is using it.
People working on python development are of course free to do what
they want, but so are the users ...

           J "actie-reactie is what my ex-brother-in-law would say" T