Python, Dutch, English, Chinese, Japanese, etc.
google at mrabarnett.plus.com
Tue Jun 5 00:46:12 CEST 2007
On Jun 4, 6:12 pm, Ross Ridge <rri... at caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
> Ross Ridge wrote:
> > Translating keywords and standard identifiers into Chinese could make
> > learning Python even more difficult. It would probably make things
> > easier for new programmers, but I don't know if serious programmers would
> > actually prefer programming using Chinese keywords. It would make their
> > Python implementations incompatible with the standard implementation, they
> > wouldn't be able to use third-party modules and their own code wouldn't
> > be portable. If novice Chinese programmers would have to unlearn much
> > of they've learned in order to become serious Python programmers are
> > you really doing them a favour by teaching them Chinese Python?
> > It would really only work if Chinese Python became it own successful
> > dialect of Python, independent of the standard Python implementation.
> > Chinese Python programmers would be isolated from other Python
> > programmers, each with their own set of third-party modules and little
> > code sharing between the two groups. I don't think this would be good
> > for Python as whole.
> Wildemar Wildenburger <wilde... at freakmail.de> wrote:
> >I don't see the problem here. The bytecode wouldn't change (right?).
> Python code generally isn't shared as bytecode and it's not just keywords
> we're talking about here, all standard Python identifiers (eg. "os" and
> "sys") would be translated too.
> >So what? One would have to make sure that the interprter understands both
> >(or to generalize: all) language versions of python and wham!
> That might work, you'd need both the standard and Chinese versions the
> Python standard libraries. I doubt anyone outside of China would want
> a distribution that included both, so there would still be barriers to
> code sharing between the two communities.
> Interestingly, someone has already created a Chinese version of Python
> much like Steve Howell suggested:
> Apparently it hasn't been updated in almost four years, so I don't know
> much use it gets.
Instead of having many different Pythons for many different languages,
how about one for a language like Esperanto?
That could be the language for the standard libraries instead of
More information about the Python-list