[Python-ideas] Anonymous blocks (again):

[Andrew Barnert]

On May 13, 2013, at 13:19, Jonathan Eunice <jonathan.eunice at gmail.com> wrote:

> That many Python functions don't produce useful values makes 
> it difficult or impossible to do "chained" or "fluent" operations a la 
> JavaScript or Perl. 

Fluency and a clean expression/statement divide are almost directly contrary goals.

Similarly, reducing "vertical" code and making all structure explicit are almost directly contrary goals.

So;

> I love that Python avoids "expression soup" and long run-on 
> invocations, but the lack of appreciable support for "fluency" or even
> a smidgeon of functional style seems to regularly "verticalize" 
> Python code

If you made Python fluent, you would allow, and maybe even encourage, JS-style "expression soup". It's a tradeoff, and I think Python made the right choice here.

I've got a lot of logic that I migrate back and forth between Python and JS, and it's definitely true that a 3-line JS function often becomes a 5-line Python function and vice versa. But the Python function is nevertheless usually faster to read, so I don't think this is a problem.

> , with several lines required do common things, such as 
> fully construct / initialize / setup an object.  

Often the answer to that is that the right API for a Python class isn't the same as the right API for a similar JS prototype. For example, because pythonic style makes much more use of exceptions than typical JS style, you don't need multistage initialization nearly as often.