[Python-ideas] Syntax: 'return: ...' expressions
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Wed Jan 21 00:21:50 CET 2015
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Andrew Barnert <
abarnert at yahoo.com.dmarc.invalid> wrote:
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 9:15, "Franklin? Lee" <leewangzhong+python at gmail.com>
> > On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Andrew Barnert
> > <abarnert at yahoo.com.dmarc.invalid> wrote:
> >> I believe the distinction isn't just there to keep the parser simpler,
> or because Guido wasn't clever enough to figure out how to embed statements
> in expressions in an indentation-significant language, or because the
> examples of Ruby and CoffeeScript didn't exist yet and now it's too late
> for Python; statements are a big part of what makes Python code more
> readable than those languages, both in-depth and in a quick scan to see the
> general flow control and state changes.
> >> But it's hard to explain why. And, even if I manage to explain why _I_
> think statements make Python more readable, that's just my opinion; it
> would be nice to have something that Guido endorsed.
> >> Also, for people who want to suggest changes to Python (or design their
> own languages), it would be helpful to understand how the distinction fits
> in with other things. For example, in a pure functional language, there may
> be no benefit to having statements. In a language where (almost) everything
> is an expression, having mutating methods return self instead of None
> wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem. More generally, expression-ness
> and not-mutating are deeply connected (e.g., comprehensions aren't designed
> for mutation, loop statements are), but it's not easy to say how. And so on.
> > Sorry to be late.
> > Will this Guido post suffice as a substitute?
> > http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=147358
> That's not what I was looking for--but it is a great counter to my
> dismissal of "just to keep the parser simpler". Guido is of course right. I
> wasn't thinking about the fact that statement parsing and expression
> parsing are different modes, with state, and it's a lot harder for a human
> mind to subconsciously keep a stack of stateful modes in short-term memory
> than for a program.
> But I still think Python gains more from the inescapable
> statement-expression than this. Guido's answer is sufficient in itself, but
> there's more there even if it weren't true.
> I suppose the way to answer that would be to come up with a language where
> complex expressions are also indentation-sensitive (and there's no paren or
> backslash continuation) and show that if you get rid of the stack of
> stateful modes, there really is no other problem putting statements inside
> expressions. That's kind of the opposite of the way people usually try to
> tackle this problem, but if Guido's right that the usual way is inherently
> bound to fail...
I've lost track which side you are now arguing for, but one example of a
language that takes indentation in complex expressions to the extreme is
Coffeescript. Having had to reverse-engineer a fairly complex piece of
Coffeescript recently, I definitely thing they went too far. It seems there
is no formal grammar for Coffeescript, just a translator, and even if there
were a formal grammar, it would have many odd corners and sharp edges.
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas