Generating list of possible configurations

Mensanator mensanator at aol.com
Fri Jul 4 01:51:52 CEST 2008


On Jul 3, 6:24 pm, George Sakkis <george.sak... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 5:49 pm, Mensanator <mensana... at aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 3, 2:52 pm, Terry Reedy <tjre... at udel.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Worthless to you, worthwhile to me.  
>
> > The OP's opinion is the only one that matters.
>
> I bet the OP doesn't know (or care) what gmpy is.

But he'll care if he tries to use something specific to
2.6 and it fails and he doesn't know why.

>
> > What do you suppose
> > is the percentage of posts on this newsgroup by those using 3.0?
>
> Taking into account 2.6 too (we're not talking about only 3.0 here),
> probably not much less than those who even know what is gmpy, let
> alone dismiss a beta Python release because their obscure pet module
> is not available yet.

That was just an example. When you consider ALL the pet
modules like PIL, Numpy, Win32, etc., that's a lot, isn't it.

> You will probably sound less negative if you refrain from projecting
> your own very specialized needs to those of the average pythonista.

Funny how you don't complain when Mr. Reedy projects HIS
specialized needs to the average pythonista.

I was just trying to be helpful (I admit I often sound
negative when I'm not trying to be).

>
> George




More information about the Python-list mailing list