Case insensitivity

[Tim Rowe]

In article <sbHa7.86105$Xr6.429154 at news-server.bigpond.net.au>, 
nhodgson at bigpond.net.au (Neil Hodgson) wrote:

>    Tim Rowe:
> > You have lots of good ideas and suggestions from others. /Please/ 
> > don't
> > change Python to accommodate them all; it would spoil it. Put them 
> > into a
> > /new/ language. Maybe even build in call and data level compatibility 
> > so
> > they can be well integrated. Then people can choose whichever one is 
> > best
> > for the task.
> 
>     That is what Guido is doing. The current language is Python 2.1, 
> future
> languages will be called Python 2.2, Python 3.0, and so forth.

I rather understood those to be successive releases of what is supposed 
the same language. I've not heard anyone speaking of using Python 2 in the 
same way I would speak of using Modula 2, where the number really /did/ 
identify the language (and distinguished it from Modula and Modula 3). 
Perhaps we should try the C route (K&R C, ANSI C, C++) and speak of GvR 
Python, ISO Python, Objective Python? ;-) But the sort of changes being 
/discussed/ (but mercifully mainly not implemented) would be more like the 
transition from BCPL to B to C, and would merit completely different 
names. Effectively, keep Python as the Best Scripting Language in the 
World -- Ever! and set about designing a new language with different 
design objectives -- maybe a general purpose programming language or a 
systems programming language -- with a significantly different design 
correctly reflecting the different design objectives, but still largely 
within the spirit of Python. It would have strong typing, would be 
compiled and fast. It would be tightly integrated with Python, rather as C 
is but more so. I'd call it Monty.