python演变,Python演变：不安

Please ignore if you are allergic to ramblings :-)

Despite a puritan streak I''ve always tried to refrain from language wars

or syntax bickering; call it enforced pragmatism. That''s the main reason

why I''ve liked Python: it''s elegant and simple and still dynamic and

flexible. You could do worse for a clean and pragmatic language.

I do know my Smaltalk from my Common Lisp and my Ruby from my C#, so I

think I''m quite capable of escaping the "Blub paradox"

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BlubParadox. I do miss some slick features in

Python. But the nice thing about Python is that in those cases I can use

its dynamism to implement it myself (and usually somebody else has done

it for me, of course).

In the end I''m not a language guru nor a framework wizard, but a mere

mortal who designs and writes programs for end-users. For that task I

need: a better standard ide, an integrated db interface with a proper

set of db drivers (!!), a better debugger, a standard widget/windows

toolkit, something akin to a standard for web programming, better

documentation, a standard lib which is better organized, a formalized

set of protocols and patterns for program construction. And an

interpreter which is fast enough to avoid using C or Pyrex in most

obvious cases.

Many will say that Van Rossum''s brainstorms/proposals as depicted in

http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=86641

will help in the above mentioned. And I''m certainly not against Optional

ype checking.

But I see little to no efforts from the core python team to address my

needs as listed above. They seem mainly to focus on the core attributes

and syntax of the language. Very little or no efforts are taken to

improve the infrastructure around the language.

And then I read the following sentence by Van Rossum:

"In order to make type inferencing a little more useful, I''d like to

restrict certain forms of extreme dynamic behavior in Python"

In the end, it''s mindset which counts. And I think that mindset is going

to be determine the way foreward for Python: more features, increased

complexity, less dynamism. Lots of syntax crud, without addressing the

need to improve the infrastructure around the language.

In short: I symphatize Patrick Logan''s feeling:

http://patricklogan.blogspot.com/200...d-to-ruin.html

Regards,

Iwan van der Kleyn

解决方案Well, I''m not a seasoned programmer like you but I have to say Python

is the singlebest language I''ve worked with to date. In a matter of

weeks I learned to do things that took me months in other languages and

even found the process enjoyable.

Maybe you are right. If so, couldn''t Python be forked into something

like you describe, while still remaining compatible at the core? (if

anyones willing)

Python++ anyone?

"flamesrock" writes:Maybe you are right. If so, couldn''t Python be forked into something

like you describe, while still remaining compatible at the core? (if

anyones willing)

It''s not an issue with the Python core (language); I read that post as

mostly bemoaning the poor state of the runtime library. I feel the

same concerns, however, fixing it is a lot of work.

Maybe a PSF grant would help? I guess this has been considered ...

Michele Simionato