UserLinux chooses Python as "interpretive language" of choice

Steve Lamb grey at
Sat Dec 20 06:03:56 CET 2003

On 2003-12-20, John Roth <newsgroups at> wrote:
> I'm not sure what your point is. 

    If you had run it you would have understood it.  You didn't run it, did

> Your example isn't going to produce the expected result if you say:

> print thisis.amethod

> instead of

> print thisis.amethod()

    Well, you kind of got it.  Here's the run:

Python 2.3+ (#2, Aug 10 2003, 11:33:47) 
[GCC 3.3.1 (Debian)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> class ThisIs:
...     avariable = 'a'
...     def amethod(self):
...         return 'b'
>>> thisis = ThisIs()
>>> print thisis.avariable
>>> print thisis.amethod()
>>> import this
The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters

Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Although practicality beats purity.
Errors should never pass silently.
Unless explicitly silenced.
In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.
Now is better than never.
Although never is often better than *right* now.
If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.
Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!
>>> print "Read line 2."
Read line 2.

    Line 2: "Explicit is better than implicit."

    thisis.amethod() is an explicit call to a method.  If you flubbed it and
overwrote your namespace later on then you would get unexpected results at
runtime.  If you remove the () it becomes an implicit call depending on the
object that is a reference to.  Hmmm, I guess I could have also finished with
this line as well, "Read line 12."  IE, "In the face of ambiguity, refuse the
temptation to guess."  

def foo:
    return 'a'

bar = foo

    Is it a or is it the function object?  Rats, now we have to make a special
case when point to a function as opposed to any other object.  D'oh, now we
need to read line 8, "Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules."
Ok, so we shouldn't make a special case here.  That also applies to where?

    How often to we make calls to functions/methods without parameters
compared to how often we do?  ;)

    Man, I never knew that little tidbit was so fun and self referencing.
Thanks Tim Peters!  :)

         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
       PGP Key: 8B6E99C5       | main connection to the switchboard of souls.

More information about the Python-list mailing list