[Python-ideas] Fwd: Make parenthesis optional in parameterless functions definitions

[Michel Desmoulin]

Le 01/04/2016 15:54, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 01:49:03PM +0200, Michel Desmoulin wrote:
> 
>> There are dozen of good way to oppose an idea, just saying "we got a
>> moral stand to not do it" is not convincing.
> 
> Nobody has made that argument.
> 
> 
>> Espacially in a language
>> with so many compromised like len(foo) instead of foo.len,
> 
> len(foo) isn't a compromise, it is an intentional feature.
> 
> 
>> functional paradigme and Poo and immutability and mutability, etc.
> 
> "Paradigm". 
> 
> You might not be aware that "poo" is an English euphemism for excrement, 
> normally used for and by children. So I'm completely confused by what 
> you mean by "and Poo".
> 

Those are both french mistake.

paradigme has a "e" in french while OOP is POO. Wrote the email too fast.

> 
>> Python has an history of making things to get out of the way:
> 
> There are many people who would say that Python's case sensitivity and 
> significant indentation "get in the way".
> 
> 
>> - no {} for indentation;
>> - optional parentheses for tuples;
> 
> No. Parentheses have nothing to do with tuples (except the empty tuple). 
> Parentheses are used for *grouping*. Parens don't make tuples, and they 
> aren't "optional" any more than parens are "optional" in addition 
> because you can write `result = (a+b)`. The parens here have nothing to 
> do with addition, and it would be misleading to say "optional 
> parentheses for addition".
> 
> 
> Writing (1, 2, 3) is similar to writing ([1, 2, 3]) or ("abc") or (123). 
> Apart from nested tuples, it's almost never needed.
> 
> 
>> - optional parenthesis for classes;
> 
> Needed for backwards compatibility. Let's not copy that misfeature into 
> future misfeatures.
> 
> 
>> If this changes does not hurt readability, ability to debug and doesn't
>> make your code/program any worst than it was but does't help even a
>> little, why not ?
> 
> Who says that it doesn't hurt readability? My personal experience tells 
> me that it DOES hurt readability, at least a little, and adds confusion 
> to the rules of what needs parens when and what doesn't.
> 
> You might not agree with my personal experience, but you shouldn't just 
> dismiss it or misrepresent it as a "moral stand". My argument cuts right 
> to the core of the argument that making parens optional helps -- my 
> experience is that it *doesn't help*, it actually HURTS.
> 
> 

But as I said earlier, I now agree with you.