Can anyone recomend a good intoduction to C...

Alex Martelli aleaxit at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 9 17:04:11 CET 2001


"Aahz Maruch" <aahz at panix.com> wrote in message
news:989cvj$sba$1 at panix3.panix.com...
> In article <983958878.976344 at newsmaster-04.atnet.at>,
> Werner Schiendl <ws-news at gmx.at> wrote:
> >
> >It supports for a real large number of different design approaches.
>
> Many of us are using Python precisely because it has a design philosophy
> that goes directly counter to TMTOWTDI.

Funny, since Python is SO great at supporting a large number
of different design approaches -- no fewer than C++ supports.

For example, you can code things up as instance-objects with
methods, but you don't HAVE to do it like that -- just as in
C++, and differently from (e.g.) Eiffel or Java, you can also
code 'real functions' -- don't have to make things into
methods if that isn't the best paradigm in certain cases.

Python goes further -- in most cases, for example, one can
choose between an explicit while-loop, or a call to the
standard function 'map' with some lambda, or the use of
a list comprehension; and it's anything but obvious that
one of these three approaches will be ideal in all cases.
(Similarly, C++ offers explicit loops as well as functions
such as std::copy that encapsulate typical uses thereof).

"One obviously-right way to do it" is a great philosophy
*for programming in the small*, but, even there, it's more
of an ideological stance than a Python reality.  And when
it comes to programming *in the large* -- design issues,
choices of paradigm[s], etc -- it's not even funny to claim
there can be just "one true way".


Alex






More information about the Python-list mailing list