More random python observations from a perl programmer

Evan Simpson evan at tokenexchange.com
Tue Aug 24 16:32:04 CEST 1999


Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at compaq.com> wrote in message
news:37C1B864.970C63DC at compaq.com...
> Evan Simpson wrote:
> >
> > A syntax for expressing explicit tuple
> > unpacking has been proposed (fn(*t)), and it remains to be seen whether
it
> > will enter the language.
>
> I'm working on an implementation of that, by the
> way, so it may be possible for people to try it
> out soon.

Sweet!  Are you doing dicts too?  I await the day when I can litter my code
with calls like "fn(1, *twople, 'with a melon?', *threeple, **websters,
**randomhouse)".

> > There are no compound
> > assignment operators since there are no assignment operators, period.
>
> I don't think it's helpful to jump on that particular
> terminological detail. The people who ask "why is there
> no += operator" aren't using the word "operator" in its
> precise technical Python sense.

Somebody else had already given the clear, helpful answer, and the repeated
references to Python statements as "functions" got me all pedantic.  I'm
better now.

> I'd say quite the opposite - this is a rare case in
> Python where IMplicitness loses! If the distinction
> between integer and floating point division were
> made explicit, by having different operators for
> them, this would cause much less grief.

You're only talking about division, right?  Now that I think about it,
Pascal's distinction between '/' (fp) and 'div' (int) division is a nice
one.

not-that-we-can-do-much-about-it-now-ly y'rs
Evan Simpson






More information about the Python-list mailing list