There was a big thread about this recently l-- and many more before that, I'm sure. Please read them before posting more... But: cPython is an open source project -- while it would be NICE to get core developer's support before going out and doing something new, if anyone is convinced that they can set up a better build system for Python -- go ahead and do it -- if it turns out all skeptic are wrong, and the issues they raise can be overcome easily enough -- then you will have proved that. But going on and on on this list about how other people should do something different isn't going to get you anywhere. One small note:
Take a SCons, for example, and try to port that to Python 3. You will see the key points that need to be solved (see the bulletproof unicode thread in this list).
uhm, in that thread, you ask for a Python2 solution (so apparently nothing to do with porting to py3) -- whereas in Python3, there is surrogateescape support. So while yes, python3's consistent, robust approach to Unicode has made processing ill-defined text harder than python2, this particular problem HAS been addressed, and in fact, is easier to to do in py2 than py3. discussing Python usage issues in development
lists is discouraged even though the issues raised there are important for language usability.
you can only put so much on one list -- if you want to discuss how to do something with the existing implementation of Python (2 or 3...) then an "ideas" list or "devel" list isn't the right place. What is the problem with that? -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception Chris.Barker@noaa.gov