avdd_

So why does the main function in this example violate the principle ... i.e. where is the dispatch table?

I've read it twice and still can't find the point.

unhelpful

Putting an informative README in your git repository seems a pretty common practice these days.

> Guix is a version of Nix

Why would I use one and not the other?

No one objected to using "pure" instead of the more common "abstract" (which is the actual antonym of "concrete") ?? Why do people do this?

why does this not have a date?

It's not a song, it's a prelude. And actually not very technically difficult, one reason for its immediate and enduring popularity. The simultaneous chords are just played very quickly one after the other and not "rolled".

Actually, it's the sharing of search terms across tabs that is useful, and is still supported.

Why? I found that useful.

schrodinger's ladder?

> I'll start with the conclusion: making backwards incompatible version of a language is a terrible idea, and it was bad a mistake.

> So let me fix that: I do recommend a single code base as the solution.

> The original advice to think very separately about your 2.x and 3.x codebases was very wrong, has wasted a ton of time (since you end up porting to python 3 twice), and overall slowed down the adoption of py3k, a slowdown that fortunately is finally lifting.

Is this opinion common? Do Guido and the other core developers admit they were wrong?

> Python 3.0 will break backwards compatibility. Totally. We're not even aiming for a specific common subset.

That a single code base is now possible, albeit "not entirely idiomatic", does support the conclusion that the original aim to break compatibility was misguided at best, and raises questions about the governance of Python overall.