Python 3K or Python 2.9?

[Ron Adam]

Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> Ron Adam a écrit :
>>
>> TheFlyingDutchman wrote:
>>
>>> I am not talking about the way it does it, but rather, the way it
>>> could do it or... could have done it. That requires no knowledge of
>>> how the interpreter currently does it unless I am proposing something
>>> that no interpreter in the world could ever do.
> (snip)
>> So if you can find a way to do things like removing self in python in 
>> such a way that it doesn't require adding more to the Core interpreter, 
>> then it might be considered.
> 
> By who ? As far as I'm concerned, I don't want 'self' to be removed, and 
> I'm probably not the only one here.

The term "might be considered" in this case is a very very small 
possibility.  It would need to be a very good solution which has some very 
nice benifits over the current way.  As you say below, it's probably not 
possible.

This was more of a challenge to get anyone who thinks it's worth doing to 
learn more about how python works rather than just propose arbitrary ideas.


>> What I've found is as my skills improve, I take more advantage of being 
>> able to modify and/or introspect how things work.  This allows more 
>> choices on how I might solve a particular problem.
> 
> The changes required by removing self would make most of this either 
> painfull or near impossible AFAICT.

Right, It would have a cascade effect in many places.


>> I also think there a lots of improvements that could be made to other 
>> parts of python such as the libraries that would be of much more 
>> practical benefit.
> 
> indeed.

Cheers,
   Ron