future of Python: Stackless, Standard -> fragmentation ?

[Cameron Laird]

In article <39DF1E75.5589C2D7 at seebelow.org>,
Grant Griffin  <g2 at seebelow.org> wrote:
			.
			.
			.
>That was very interesting, and it makes good sense.  But I guess the
>thing that confuses me, in that context, is the assertion I have read
>that Stackless is 100% backwards compatible with CPython.  Is the
>"irreconcilable difference", then, in terms of the _new_ features or
>capabilities that Stackless adds?  If so, JPython programmers presumably
>could happily continue to do without them, in the same way that CPython
>programmers currently do; only programs that rely on the new features
>would be incompatible with JPython.
			.
			.
			.
Yes.  In fact, parodists have occasionally sketched
the "is Stackless fit for the core distribution?"
counterargument as, "oh, sure, it's fine, until
people start *using* its capabilities."  The pro-
Stackless crowd frequently talks about it as a pure
win at the level of Python programming, because Py-
thon is indistinguishable from Stackless Python,
except that the latter is better.
-- 

Cameron Laird <claird at NeoSoft.com>
Business:  http://www.Phaseit.net
Personal:  http://starbase.neosoft.com/~claird/home.html