[Python-Dev] Common runtime sociology

[Dan Sugalski]

At 06:11 PM 8/8/2001 -0700, Paul Prescod wrote:
>It is my gut feeling that the only way to get to a common runtime (if it
>is possible at all) is to take the development out of the hands of any
>language group and put it in a trusted third party's hands. If any
>language group feels like its concerns are going to get second-class
>attention, they'll go back and focus on their own implementation.

I think it's possible for things to be done otherwise, but it puts a heavy 
burden on the implementation group to be actively engaged with the language 
groups and be as impartial as can be managed. You almost need to take the 
implementation group that starts this and pry them loose to be an entity in 
and of themselves, separate from the original language group. (FWIW, this 
is part of my Master Plan. Dunno if it's part of Simon's)

It's certainly the more difficult way to go than to start with an impartial 
third party. (Of course, then there's the problem of *finding* an impartial 
third party for something like this) For the record, if something like this 
does go through, I'm all for it and'll bow out of the way. (Any resemblance 
to dropped hot rocks is purely coincidental ;)

As for the common runtime, that's by far the least of the problems. I mean, 
we all manage with C, of all things, running on hardware that's not in the 
least forgiving of dynamic languages. We'd be hard pressed to find a worse 
environment to run on short of dragging out one of the old LISP or Forth 
systems...

					Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk