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

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:00:19PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
>  > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 05:24:47PM -0400, Terry Jan Reedy wrote:
[...]
>  > > 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.

I'm sorry, I did not intend my agreement to be read as a criticism of 
you. To be perfectly honest, I may not have even read your earlier 
emails. (These threads tend to be long, and my time is not unlimited.)

I was agreeing with Terry as a general point. I too see far too many 
people throwing out misapplied references to the Zen, or as an knee-jerk 
way to avoid thinking about a problem. (Especially "Only One Way", which 
isn't even in the Zen.)

I'm not going to name names, because (1) I don't remember specific 
examples, and (2) even if I did, it wouldn't be productive to shame 
people for misapplying the Zen long after the fact. Hell, it's quite 
likely that I have been one of those people, I know that sometimes I 
react conservatively to some suggestions, perhaps *too* conservatively.

So I'm sorry that you read my agreement as a criticism of your comments, 
it was not intended that way, it was just me being enthusiastic to agree 
with Terry's reminder that we all should avoid using the Zen to avoid 
thought.



-- 
Steven