Sturla Molden writes:
Guido van Rossum skrev:
I propose a moratorium on language changes.
Isn't this the same as saying it is time to produce an industry standard (as in ISO, ECMA, ANSI, IEEE) for the Python language?
No. The language reference is quite precise and accurate AFAICS. There may be an argument for an industry standard, but this isn't it.
As I see it, the problem is not "language changes", but one implementation (CPython) being the "de facto" Python language standard. Maybe there should be a real Python standard?
Would it make a difference? Surely the CPython implementation would still be the de facto "reference interpretation" for resolving ambiguities. Note that many argue that the success of the Internet is due to deliberate adherence to a PEP-like process that involves actually implementing and demonstrating usefulness of new features. OTOH, the ISO and other standards bodies are famous for standards produced by language lawyers. These standards are sometimes unusable, and too often ignored in favor of well-known best practices. In the end, I think it would be hard to convince the developer community to abandon the PEP process. So any ISO effort would be layered on top of it, and CPython would still have distinguished status.