Guido van Rossum wrote:
let this be an advance warning that it will be called Python 2.0.
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Vladimir Marangozov wrote:
Guido van Rossum just won't stop surprising us! :-)
Will many be spooked by the jump in version number into fearing incompatibility with older scripts...? I wonder if we'll end up trying to persuade the user community that the changes are small ("no, don't worry, your scripts will still work") and yet big ("honest, it really deserves to be called 2.0, it's not just a ploy") at the same time. Perl 5 was basically incompatible with Perl 4. Some things run, but a lot don't. (Actually many microversions of Perl 5 were mutually incompatible with each other, but i'll ignore that. :) ) I've thought of the jump to Python3k (lowercase "k", please) much like the Perl-4-to-Perl-5 jump: simple stuff is still okay but a lot of guts have changed. If i hadn't been "on the inside" watching development activity, i might expect something of similar magnitude upon hearing of going from Python 1.x to 2.0. I guess we can point at Unicode and SRE as big things. -- ?!ng