Python 3.0 migration plans?

[Diez B. Roggisch]

TheFlyingDutchman wrote:

> 
>>
>> Or bind resources of these pocket protectors that otherwise would lead to
>> answers for people that do seek enlightment...
> 
> I don't think it would be correct to characterize my posts as not
> seeking enlightenment. I do also happen to voice my opinion which
> seems appropriate since this can be characterized as a discussion
> group. It theoretically is possible for a discussion group to tolerate
> opinions that diverge from the majority.

I would characterize

"""
I like how someone here characterized decorators - those silly @
things. They remind me of Perl. Not adding keywords for abstract and
static is like Perl not adding a keyword for class.
"""

not as seeking enlightenment, but as pure trolling. Disqualifying features
without actually understanding them as "silly" certainly doesn't lie on one
of the many path's to enlightenment known man - which to my knowledge
usually require more humble approaches....

> One issue I have with this group and that I encountered many years ago
> in the Perl group is that there is no separate group
> comp.lang.python.beginner where you can ask questions without getting
> hit with RTFM! and the like.

And I wish people that have no clue about the deeper workings of Python
wouldn't insist on commenting on these in inappropriate ways as above, but
instead try and _understand_ them before debuking them or suggesting
changes.

Diez