PEP 285: Adding a bool type

[Arthur Siegel]

>Its designers were very concerned about newbies 
>being confused by traditional computer science
>terms like "function", "procedure" and "variable", 
>so they invented all new terminology. Functions 
>ended up being called YIELDs, procedures were 
>HOW-TOs, statements became commands, and variables
>became locations.

>The main effect this had was to confuse the died-in-the-wool
>programmers; it didn't make any difference for the newbies because
>they had to learn the concepts anyway.

I'm confused again.

One of Alice's signficant "lessons" was that it was important
to use terms like "move" and "turn" rather than "translate" and
"rotate" - in the context of doing 3d.  I thought it was a ridiculous
conclusion for the reasons you outline (among others).  I never had any
reason to suspect before now that you shared my view. Quite, in
fact, the opposite.

Your article in the Linux journal was quite explicit in promoting
the use of a 'simplified' vocabulary in the context of the IDE
of the future - clearly rejecting the concept that adopting
settled vocabulary was a good thing.

And PEP228 which you now announce has no importance
for Python's future was specifically referred to as a basis 
for the adoption of the PEP238 - what a few months ago.

I will be accused of course of flame baiting again.

But I in fact just don't get it.

Though at least I am able to just not get it with significantly
less passion attached than in prior go rounds.

Art