Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I would prefer to see some variation on Nick Coglan's ideas about a "where" keyword for local scoping of temporary variables.
I second that. This is the way mathematicians use the word "where", and it would be a much better way of spending a keyword.
In my experience, for every line of code you write, you'll probably need anything from 3-10 lines of test code.
Indeed. Also, the situations where you can meaningfully test each function on its own using a few concisely- expressed test cases are relatively rare, IMO. It looks good for the kind of exercises you find in programming courses, but it doesn't scale up to real-life code that requires complex data structures and test harnesses to be set up.