[Python-ideas] [Spam] Re: Anonymous blocks (again):

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Steven D'Aprano writes:
 > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 05:24:47PM -0400, Terry Jan Reedy wrote:

 > > As for your soapbox issue:

Which is, strictly speaking, off-topic, since he disclaims the intent
to advocate a change to Python, let alone propose a concrete change.

His post on method chaining was thoughtful, but really, it's hardly
fair to criticize anyone for confusing a-Pythonicity of method
chaining with some inherent flaw in that style.  This list is for
advocating changes to Python, and I don't see how my post could be
construed in that context as claiming the method-chaining style is
inherently flawed, vs. inappropriate for further support in Python.

 > > People sometimes misuse Tim Peter's Zen of Python points. He
 > > wrote them to stimulate thought, not serve as a substitute for
 > > thought, and certainly not be a pile of mudballs to be used to
 > > chase people away.
 > 
 > +1000

As the person who cited "Pythonicity" and several points of the Zen in
this thread, I would appreciate instruction as to how I "misused" the
terms or "substituted mudballs for thought", rather than simply being
bashed for criticizing someone else's (admittedly thoughtful) post.
And especially not being bashed at a multiplication factor of 1000.

@Haoyi:  I'm sorry.  I do apologize for the implication that anybody
should "go away".  I should have been more careful with pronouns.  The
"you" who likes method chaining was intended to be different from the
"you" who "*do* have the choice of languages".  But I could have, and
should have, avoided writing "you" in the second case.  You are
clearly making useful contributions in code as well as in discussion,
and I'd appreciate you staying around for a while.  A long while.

The intended point, restated, was "If method chaining were not well-
supported in other languages, it would be arguable that this might be
a good innovation for Python even though it's not positively Pythonic.
But it is well-supported elsewhere, so there is no *need* for it in
Python."  I can see how one might disagree with that, but I hope noone
finds it offensive.