PEP 308: A PEP Writer's Experience
Laura Creighton
lac at strakt.com
Sat Feb 8 22:01:58 EST 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Sat Feb 8 22:01:58 EST 2003
- Previous message (by thread): PEP 308: A PEP Writer's Experience - CON
- Next message (by thread): PEP 308: A PEP Writer's Experience - CON
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> In article <mailman.1044728061.20169.python-list at python.org>, > Dave Brueck <dave at pythonapocrypha.com> wrote: > >On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Aahz wrote: > >> > >> It introduces more parsing overhead in human readability than any change > >> since list comprehensions, and it introduces more semantic/syntactic > >> overhead in human readability than generators. (I'm still deeply unhappy > >> about losing the fight to add a keyword to the front of generators.) > > > >How can you possibly substantiate that statement? There's no metric for > >"parsing overhead in human readability". I can just as easily say it adds > >very little overhead because it doesn't overload the meaning of the > >keywords used. > > Michael Chermside claimed, "Really... there's no new conceptual > overhead..." I made a counter-claim. T'ain't possible to refute > either. > -- > Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ Actually, we did something like in the early 1980s by giving students some C programs to read, and some questions to answer afterwards, online. We timed how quickly they started answering questions, among other things. So you could measure this. But I don't have access to a lab set up like this any more. Laura
- Previous message (by thread): PEP 308: A PEP Writer's Experience - CON
- Next message (by thread): PEP 308: A PEP Writer's Experience - CON
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list