| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
PythronPythronPosted Dec 4, 2008 3:08 UTC (Thu) by ncm (subscriber, #165)Parent article: Python 3.0 released
If it's incompatible, it's a different language, and needs a different name. I feel obliged to call this one "Pythron".
(Log in to post comments)
Pythron Posted Dec 4, 2008 4:17 UTC (Thu) by kev009 (subscriber, #43906) [Link]
Wishful thinking. Python 3 is hardly a new language. C, C++, FORTRAN, ADA, etc over the years which were subjected to much worse change between versions and manufactures. Python 3 is an evolutionary upgrade and contains helpful tools to switch over by means of Python 2.6 and the migration scripts. I doubt Perl 6 will handle evolution this smoothly :P.
Pythron Posted Dec 5, 2008 16:45 UTC (Fri) by elanthis (subscriber, #6227) [Link]
C++ hasn't had a significant compatibility-breaking change in about 15-20 years. Even the changes being introduced in C++0x have been carefully selected to all but ensure that existing software won't stop compiling, even if that meant that the new syntax and keywords are a little less than optimal in some cases. (It's true that a lot of C++ code kept breaking with each g++ release, but that's because g++ kept dropping support for broken code that it used to accept; totally g++'s fault and the fault of people who can't seem to comprehend C++, which is _not_ as hard as some detractors claim it is.)
Python, on the other hand, breaks applications with every single point release. On top of that, it breaks the embedding API with almost every single point release. It's a constantly moving target.
Pythron Posted Dec 11, 2008 16:30 UTC (Thu) by rriggs (subscriber, #11598) [Link] (It's true that a lot of C++ code kept breaking with each g++ release, but that's because g++ kept dropping support for broken code that it used to accept; totally g++'s fault and the fault of people who can't seem to comprehend C++, which is _not_ as hard as some detractors claim it is.)Bullpucky! From Scott Meyers, hardly a C++ detractor: " C++ developers could really use a larger tool set, but the barrier to entry for truly powerful tools is the ability to parse C++ source code, and thats a barrier very few have been able to breach. "C++ is nearly impossible to parse, primarily because it continues to rely on the C preprocessor. I develop in Python and in C++. C++ certainly has its uses. But crappy syntax and a standard library that can't hold a candle to most other modern languages are its two biggest faults.
Pythron Posted Dec 11, 2008 23:42 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] C++ is nearly impossible to parse, primarily because it continues to rely on the C preprocessor.I've written a C++ parser, and, believe me, the C preprocessor can be almost completely ignored: it doesn't make anything harder. It is *not* the problem. The rampant context-sensitivity is the problem. A trivial example that everyone knows: is A foo (b); a declaration of a variable 'foo' of type 'A', and its initialization via a single-argument constructor, passing the variable 'b', or a declaration of a function 'foo' taking a single parameter of type 'b' and returning an 'A'? To answer that you have to know if 'b' is a type or not at that point in the program *at parsing time*.
Pythron Posted Dec 4, 2008 4:25 UTC (Thu) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]
I would judge the level of incompatibility as "mostly harmless." :) If you feel the absolute compulsion for a new name, perhaps "Python as it should have been all along" would be a good choice... I heartily applaud the decisions made in this major revision... it'll make my life easier.
Pythron Posted Dec 4, 2008 4:48 UTC (Thu) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
I suppose you could change the name of the auld language, instead. May I propose "Pychthon"? (Fhtaghn!)
Pythron Posted Dec 4, 2008 12:09 UTC (Thu) by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989) [Link]
It would be a WASTE to change it to anything but Pynchon.
|
|
||||||||||||