Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!panix!not-for-mail From: Grant Edwards Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Why Python 4.0 won't be like Python 3.0 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:51:21 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl.comtrol.com X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1408373481 3085 64.122.56.22 (18 Aug 2014 14:51:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:51:21 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Linux) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:76480 On 2014-08-17, Mark Lawrence wrote: > A blog from Nick Coghlan > http://www.curiousefficiency.org/posts/2014/08/python-4000.html that > should help put a few minds to rest. I agree with the comments that the appellation for "simply the next version after 3.9" should be 3.10 and not 4.0. Everybody I know considers SW versions numbers to be dot-separated tuples, not floating point numbers. To all of us out here in user-land a change in the first value in the version tuple means breakage and incompatibilities. And when the second value is "0", you avoid it until some other sucker has found the bugs and a few more minor releases have come out. I don't think one (or several) blog posts is going to change the perceptions and expectations that have been coditioned into us by decades of experience with x.0 versions of countless software packages. If it's just another in a a series of incremental "bug fix and minor enhancements without breaking backwards incompatibility" releases, you simply do not call it vers x.0. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Bo Derek ruined at my life! gmail.com