On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Tal Einat <taleinat@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:53 PM, geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> wrote:
It's unfortunate that there isn't a good way to do this kind of long-range work within the auspices of Python. I can imagine a number of projects like this that fail to attract interest due to low perceived chances of success and a dearth of community feedback.
Once a good library had a solid foundation, it could plug itself into some widely used Python programs and gain publicity and support from there, before pushing for inclusion in the stdlib.
A good example is Django's URL mapping, which currently uses regexps. I think it would be possible to get Django to support an alternate pattern matching method, in addition to regexps, since this would make learning Django easier for developers who don't grok regexps.
Ah, but geremy is complaining about work that cannot be done as a library, e.g. syntax changes. This is because I suggested a better approach to matching would probably require syntax changes. I don't have an answer -- it may be easier to create a whole new language and experiment with matching syntax than it is to get a PEP approved for a matching syntax extension to Python... That's just how it goes for mature languages. Try getting new syntax added to C++, Java or JavaScript... :-) -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)