[Python-ideas] Fwd: Concurrent safety?

[Nick Coghlan]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:45:42 +0900
> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
>> Mike Meyer writes:
>>  > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>wrote:
>>  > > I didn't say it did, it "merely" imposes substantial inconvenience in
>>  > > hope that:
>>  > >  > It just forces them to *think* about what they're doing beforehand.
>>  > > which I believe to be un-Pythonic.
>>  > Really? Thinking is unpythonic?
>> No, "forcing" is.  Consenting adults and all that.
>
> But you yourself admit that this isn't forcing you to think:

It's forcing you to think the way Java's checked exceptions force you
to think - they make you think "Gee, it's tedious having to write all
this boilerplate to get the compiler/interpreter to STFU and let me
get on with doing my job".

"safe by default" is an excellent design principle, but so is "stay
out of the way". The two are often in tension, and this is one of
those times.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia