[Python-ideas] Statement local functions and classes (aka PEP 3150 is dead, say 'Hi!' to PEP 403)

[Jim Jewett]

On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info>
>> wrote:

>>> If it's not tested, how do you know it does what you need?

>> Because my script does what I want. ...
>> they're writing scripts to *get things done*.

> "And it doesn't matter whether it's done correctly, so long as
> SOMETHING gets done!!!" <wink>

So they have only system tests, and not unit tests.   (Or at least not
to the level you would recommend.)  But if the system tests pass, that
really is enough.  (And yes, there could be bugs exposed later by data
that didn't show up in the system tests -- but that is still better
than most of the other software in that environment.)

> I'm not convinced that requiring coders to write:

> given a, b c
> do f(a, b, c)

> instead of

> do f(a, b, c)
> given a, b, c

> gets in the way of getting things done.

Nah; people can interrupt their train of thought to scroll up.  Doing
so doesn't improve their code, but it isn't a deal-breaker.

Requiring that order does get in the way of reuse, because burying the
lede [ do f(a,b,c) ] makes it a bit harder to find, so there is a
stronger temptation to just fork another copy.

-jJ