[Tutor] Re: Are you allowed to shoot camels? [kinda OT]

[Smith, Jeff]

Roel,

That was well put.  Too many people complain about certain language
features because of the way they are abused independent of whether or
not they have any value when used properly.  In that case it's throwing
the baby out with the bath-water...and won't achieve anything since bad
programmers will be bad programmers no matter how much you try and
constrain them.  And in doing so you manage to prevent good programmers
from creating clear conscise statements that exactly express the logic
that they are trying to impliment.

Jeff


-----Original Message-----
From: Roel Schroeven [mailto:rschroev_nospam_ml at fastmail.fm] 
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:00 PM
To: tutor at python.org
Subject: [Tutor] Re: Are you allowed to shoot camels? [kinda OT]


In my experience, such lists often go too far in that respect. I agree 
that fall-trough should mostly be avoided (except when multiple values 
should leed to the same branch). Ternary operators can certainly be 
abused (as demonstrated by much of the IOCCC entries), but can 
absolutely be useful when judisciously used. Many such lists seem to 
assume that developers can't judge such things for themselves. I think 
that if you have developers that can't do that, you have worse problems 
than a ternary operator here and there.