Why "from __future__" stinks; a counter-offer
aahz at panix.com
Tue Mar 20 00:48:55 CET 2001
In article <memo.20010319213204.8771C at digitig.compulink.co.uk>,
Tim Rowe <tim at digitig.cix.co.uk> wrote:
>But there's part of the problem; egoless PEP writing is as hard as
>egoless programming, and having come up with a solution the author
>of that solution is bound to have some emotional involvement in that
>solution. There have been (rightly IMHO) howls of protest about
>__future__, but Tim has said it's ok for him, routinely dismisses all
>protests, presumably because he genuinely doesn't understand what our
>problem is, and he tells us it's going in anyway. Can you see why we're
>not all convinced that the PEP process is any help to us?
I think that of the various people to accuse of having an ego tied up in
something, the Timbot is one of the last that I would choose. No, it's
more that Uncle Timmy is *lazy*. Thus, to get his interest, you have to
appeal to his laziness.
So far, no other person has actually come up with a scheme that addreses
the problem at hand, as opposed to simply whining, suggesting minor and
worthless variations, or putting forth even *more* complicated solutions.
One of the nice things about this solution is that if it is decided to be
an ugly wart, it can be easily dropped for Python 2.2.
--- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2001 by aahz at pobox.com)
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
There's a difference between a person who gets shit zie doesn't deserve
and a person who gets more shit than zie deserves. --Aahz
More information about the Python-list