[Edu-sig] quantum instance

Arthur ajsiegel at optonline.net
Wed Sep 14 01:16:48 CEST 2005

Scott David Daniels wrote:

>I would say that writing computer programs without an understanding of
>computer science is certainly possible (and I've worked with lots of
>people who do so), but to write well, and to write are not the same
>skill at all.
Let me sign on to your point of view.  I am writing for other human beings.

But which other human beings?

A little ditty I had written here was judged harshly (and incorrectly, I 
believe), because it  spoke in a vocabulary of finance  - to programmers.

Can someone whose first identity is as a programmer judge the writing of 
someone whose is not.

Back to where I started to get testy:

properties and decorators

I honestly believe that if I had seen them in my first Python Triangle 
class I would have judged myself to be looking at a language that might 
be swell - for somebody else.  But a little too magical, 
self-referential and self-involved - for my own taste.  And would have 
moved on.

Which might have saved the Python community from the annoyances of one 
annoying guy.

But I can imagine someone with my sensibilities - just a lot less 
annoying - having moved on, and  think that would have been a shame.

Is that really how we do a Triangle in Python today?

Can we accept the less sophisticated appraoches on equal footing?


More information about the Edu-sig mailing list