Named code blockes

[Douglas Alan]

"Alex Martelli" <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes:

> Two interestingly embricated claims.  I do see the interest in
> separate, Python-like languages such as PyHTML -- domain specific
> and all.  But there seems to be an underlying hypothesis here that
> it's best to do EVERYTHING in ONE language, including implementing
> other ones on top of it.

And a wonderful hypothesis it is.

By doing so, you lower the barier to allowing people to accomplish
what they want to accomplish.  Isn't that what a high-level language
is all about?

> One of Python's specific design choices was to reject that: it was
> deliberately designed to cooperate well with other tools (and
> languages in particular) instead.

Embracing one does not mean rejecting the other, since any language
designer with any sense realizes that even if the goal of being able
to do everything in one language is a noble one, that it is not yet a
practical goal to achieve today.  Allowing a language to cooperate
well with other languages, while also nibling away at the goal of
being able to do more and more within the language, is the
pragmatist's way.

> It seems to me no convincing case has ever been made that a single
> language MUST do everything well.  Many widespread languages aim at
> that -- Common Lisp, Dylan, C++, Eiffel, Java, just to name a few.
> Python doesn't.

> I prefer Python.

Well, you clearly don't prefer Python as much as me, since I'd prefer
to use it for everything.

|>oug

P.S. Btw, I never "clamored" for any changes.  I merely mused on what
would make Python a better language.  You, as much as anyone, should
understand the difference.