Acrimony in c.l.p.
dsavitsk
dsavitsk at e-coli.net
Mon Dec 23 01:57:24 EST 2002
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Dec 23 01:57:24 EST 2002
- Previous message (by thread): Connect to the list's newsgroup!
- Next message (by thread): Acrimony in c.l.p.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
"Tim Peters" <tim.one at comcast.net> wrote in message news:mailman.1040612623.24564.python-list at python.org... > [Terry Hancock] > >> Python, I find, is> consistently frustrating to any such impulses > >> I might have. Most newbies can figure out even fairly clever code > >> by reading the source alone. There are exceptions, but, IMHO, not > >> as many. > > [dsavitsk] > > This seems to me to be a bit of a myth which was more true in 1.5.2 > > days. > > I don't think so. If, for example, you dig into the actual archives, even > in Python 1.0 days you're sure to find threads between me and Steven > Majewski that even today nobody else would understand. Point taken. However, I suppose I am meaning something shallower. For example, writing >>> l = [i for i in range(10)] instead of >>> l = [] >>> for i in range(10): ... l.append(i) is less readable, imo, to a newbie. I don't think this is either a negative or a positive, or an encouragement to use one syntax over another, but simply an observation that one seems more readable to someone just starting. Certainly 1.5.2 features would be more difficult to understand than 1.4, which would be in turn more difficult to read than 1.0 (or indeed 0.9.6). All this is is an observation that languages tend toward complexity, Python included (I asked a linguist who says that, indeed, often in language irregular forms are not just tolerated and preserved, but are in fact favored). * * * > Here's the plan: When someone uses a feature you don't understand, simply > shoot them. This is easier than learning something new, and before too long > the only living coders will be writing in an easily understood, tiny subset > of Python 0.9.6 <wink>. again, I think my observation was simply positive and not normative. I am certainly not opposed to new things going in, particularly when they don't break old things :-) -d
- Previous message (by thread): Connect to the list's newsgroup!
- Next message (by thread): Acrimony in c.l.p.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list