Python becoming less Lisp-like

news.sydney.pipenetworks.com nytimes at swiftdsl.com.au
Wed Mar 16 11:57:48 CET 2005


Torsten Bronger wrote:
> Hallöchen!
> 
> "news.sydney.pipenetworks.com" <nytimes at swiftdsl.com.au> writes:
> 
> 
>>Torsten Bronger wrote:
>>
>>
>>>[...]
>>>
>>>I have exactly the same impression, but for me it's the reason
>>>why I feel uncomfortable with them.  For example, I fear that a
>>>skilled package writer could create a module with surprising
>>>behaviour by using the magic of these constructs.  I don't know
>>>Python well enough to get more specific, but flexibility almost
>>>always make confusing situations for non-hackers possible.
>>
>>In that case I wouldn't worry about the magic which can be done in
>>python but the magic which can be done in C (which many modules
>>are written in).
> 
> 
> The magic in Python must allow the magic in C.
> 

You have answered your own question.

>>Sometimes I think people complain just to complain.
> 
> 
> It's interesting though that the concerns I mentioned have
> influenced so many language designs, isn't it?
> 
> Look, you may weight the pros and cons differently from me, that's
> perfectly okay.  But don't tell me my thoughts were invalid.
> 

I agree. It was an uncalled for statement and I apologise. I guess 
theres got to be critics for the language to become better.

I just think certain arguments are a bit thin. Especially all the talk 
about the decorator syntax. I have never seen so much discussion over 
such a small detail. It's not as if the BDFL is going to start 
introducing all types of special chars in the language. From the way 
people carry on, it shall as heck sounds like it.

More in relation to the original topic, why can't people just ignore 
features they don't understand and may never use directly. Tell me you 
understand exactly how every single module you have ever used works 
whether or not its written in pure simple python or python with hacky 
features. Regardless of how a piece of software is written, as long as 
it works, has a good test bed, has a smart programmer behind, then lets 
trust the guy to do a good job. If you don't, then you can write it 
yourself which means you can do exactly how you want it which again 
makes the whole argument mute.

You can't take a ride on someones sweat and blood and expect them to 
control how they program as well can you ? If you're paying them, then 
make sure they don't use any special features.


Huy



More information about the Python-list mailing list