2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters

Rhamphoryncus rhamph at gmail.com
Fri Oct 31 03:38:46 CET 2008


On Oct 30, 8:23 pm, "Patrick Stinson" <patrickstinson.li... at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Speaking of the big picture, is this how it normally works when
> someone says "Here's some code and a problem and I'm willing to pay
> for a solution?" I've never really walked that path with a project of
> this complexity (I guess it's the backwards-compatibility that makes
> it confusing), but is this problem just too complex so we have to keep
> talking and talking on forum after forum? Afraid to fork? I know I am.
> How many people are qualified to tackle Andy's problem? Are all of
> them busy or uninterested? Is the current code in a tight spot where
> it just can't be fixed without really jabbing that FORK in so deep
> that the patch will die when your project does?
>
> Personally I think this problem is super-awesome on the hobbyest's fun
> scale. I'd totally take the time to let my patch do the talking but I
> haven't read enough of the (2.5) code. So, I resort to simply reading
> the newsgroups and python code to better understand the mechanics
> problem :(

The scale of this issue is why so little progress gets made, yes.  I
intend to solve it regardless of getting paid (and have been working
on various aspects for quite a while now), but as you can see from
this thread it's very difficult to convince anybody that my approach
is the *right* approach.



More information about the Python-list mailing list