python without OO

michele.simionato at gmail.com michele.simionato at gmail.com
Thu Jan 27 12:40:24 CET 2005


Peter Maas:
>michele.simion... at gmail.com schrieb:

>> Davor is right: even if
>> you do not want to use it, the stuff is *there* and somebody in your
>> team will. So definitely there is an audience of programmers that
just
>> do not have an use for all the sophistication and actually are
>> penalized by it.

>No, because Python does not enforce using advanced concepts. You
>can write programs that are as simple as in 1991. A group of
developers
>always has to find some kind of common style with a chance that some
>are penalized. This can happen with every language.

No. In theory C++ could be kept as simple as C but in practice it is
not.

>> There is not much than can be done at the Python level. But I would
>> see with interest a Python spinoff geared towards simplicity.

>I think this would be useless because advanced concepts exist for
>a reason. A simplified spin-off would aquire advanced concepts
>over time and would just become a clone of Python.

And then we will need another simplified spinoff ;)
There is always a fight between simplificity and complexity.
Some complexity is not needed, and I am sure even in Python
something could be dropped. But it is difficult to find what can
be removed. Remember that Saint-Exupery quote? Something
like "a work of art is finished when there is nothing left to remove?"
M.S.




More information about the Python-list mailing list