Long Live Python!

[Alex Martelli]

"Peter Hansen" <peter at engcorp.com> wrote in message
news:3B504707.86D6ED85 at engcorp.com...
> Alex Martelli wrote:
> >
> > "phil hunt" <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > No it would not. If I say "my car is convenient for journeys <10
miles",
> > > it doesn't mean it is inconvenient for journeys >10 miles, does it?
> >
> > Sure, and if I say "I never strangle British citizens on Saturdays",
that
    ...
> I think you've left the original context behind, Alex.  Phil was
responding

Definitely: I was responding specifically to this observation with my
usual tirade about over-qualification and Aristotle's failings in dealing
with it.  My disagreements with you guys about 'scripting' having to
do with 'shortness of programs' are completely separate.  Take the
delightful book Jon Bentley entitled "Programming Pearls" [NOT
"Scripting Pearls"!] -- it's chock full of delightful programs that are
shorter than 100 lines, yet are not "scripts" in the common perception
and common usage of the word: they do not automate repetitive
sequences of operations that might commonly be performed by
an interactive user &c.  (I think one area where the term 'script'
is often used to describe programs that are _neither_ short _nor_
automating &c is CGI -- thousand-line CGI "scripts" that aren't
"scripts" by any sensible definition except the fact that in CGI one
uses that term are far from exceptional -- but don't let me start
my _Wittgenstein_ tirade about natural language's irreducibility
to precision...:-).


Alex