the death of lecter
Erik Max Francis
max at alcyone.com
Mon Sep 11 19:03:48 CEST 2000
Michal Wallace wrote:
> * immediate if:
> print 'x is', x > 0 ? 'positive' : 'negative'
> # I still wish we had a ?: operator..
> # It would be great for lambdas!
Yeah, an if-else operation compacted into an operator would be rather
> * design by contract (require/ensure/implies)
> # I still think this would be a good idea!
> # maybe instead of keywords, they ought to be in
> # a contract module?
Why not write your own and release it?
> * foreach someSequence: print this
> # where "this" is a keyword... I think this is dumb now,
> # but the idea was to have a perl-like anonymous variable
This seems rather unnecessary; besides, Python isn't Perl, so it
shouldn't be doing all the things that Perl does. When you can write
for x in someSequence: print x
It's really hard to see how eliminating the x and using an anonymous
variable (with the addition of _two_ new keywords) really saves you
> * extended 'try' syntax:
> print 'do something'
> print 'catch errors'
> print 'clean up' # not allowed in real Python
> # not sure why you'd want to do this, but the fact that you
> # can't seems kind of sad.. :)
finally is supported in Python, you just can't have it following a try
clause that also contains either an else or an except.
> maybe someday:
> * /regexp/ and x =~ /regexp/
> # ick! :)
Python ain't Perl.
Erik Max Francis / max at alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
__ San Jose, CA, US / 37 20 N 121 53 W / ICQ16063900 / &tSftDotIotE
/ \ Many things are lost for want of asking.
\__/ (an English proverb)
Esperanto reference / http://mirror/alcyone/max/lang/esperanto/
An Esperanto reference for English speakers.
More information about the Python-list