Home Original page

Python 1.6 The balanced language

lobozc at my-deja.com lobozc at my-deja.com
Fri Sep 1 19:28:59 EDT 2000 
In article <39ADEA85.7C38771D at holdenweb.com>,
  sholden at BellAtlantic.net wrote:
>
> Much as I like Icon (and Python too, for that matter), I would humbly
> suggest that these features of Icon just don't belong in Python.  The
> overhead of supporting them in the many contexts in which they aren't
> really required would reduce efficiency.
>
I'm not sure whether your argument against inclusion of some of icon-
like features in Python is because of efficiency or changing the basic
nature of the language.

Efficiency. I don't know how much efficiency would suffer. That should
be measured first. The numbers could be different from expectations -
we have many examples of that in the programming world. If the the
effect would not be strong an argument to consider: if we need a good
scripting language than expressiveness is more important than
efficiency (within reason, of course). Summary: we shouldn't disqualify
the idea just on this - before evaluating it further.

> Plus, despite continued demand for many new features, I believe there
> has to be a point beyond which you must accept you are changing the
basic
> nature of the language.
>

Changing? I'd prefer to call it 'enriching' :-) BUt I agree, both are
loaded terms :-) Still, with this line of argument we wouldn't get list
comprehensions in Python!

> Surely the best approach accepts that some problems are best for one
> language, others for another, so we should just use the appropriate
> language for each problem.
>
Agreed. I wouldn't use Java when C++ is necessary [and there are many
such places]. But scripting languages almost by definition were trying
to cover more specializations than just one. Almost every language is
doing that. Java - started as an TV-top embedded, then evolved into an
applet writer and now they are trying to use it for everything
(unfortunately...)

I agree that there is a fine line about extending a language - between
making it universal and too complicated or simple and not very general.

Using multiple languages for the job? Now and again programmers show
that they prefer to use just one :)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
More information about the Python-list mailing list