Python 3.0 migration plans?

Diez B. Roggisch deets at
Fri Sep 28 18:49:16 CEST 2007

Paul Rubin wrote:

> "Diez B. Roggisch" <deets at> writes:
>> All serious languages are turing-complete. So can we put away with this
>> non-sense argument right away, please?
> Actually the so called "total" languages aren't Turing-complete.  I
> think Coq is an example: every Coq function must return a value.  So


Please, Paul. There is no need to hijack every thread to show off your mad
functional and wicked staticly typed programming language skillz. We had
that discussion at a different time, and you very well know that with
serious I didn't mean "can be used to program rockets that don't fall of
the earth", but that aren't toy-languages used to solve real-world


More information about the Python-list mailing list