py3k s***s

[Aaron Watters]

On Apr 16, 2:33 pm, Rhamphoryncus <rha... at gmail.com> wrote:
> The point is, you can't have it both ways.  Either you evolve the
> language and break things, or you keep it static and nothing breaks.

I disagree.  You can add lots of cool
stuff without breaking the existing code base, mostly.
For example the minor changes to the way ints will work will
effect almost no programs.

I don't see the urgency to clean up what are essentially
cosmetic issues and throw out or
require rewrites for just about all existing Python
code. Python 2.6 isn't fundamentally awful like Perl 4 was.
The cost paid for these minor improvements is too high in my
book.  But I suppose if it is going to happen do it sooner
rather than later.  Just *please* *please* don't
systematically break the pre-existing code base again for a
very long time, preferable ever.
  -- Aaron Watters

===
http://www.xfeedme.com/nucular/pydistro.py/go?FREETEXT=whack