Perl's documentation come of age
steve at holdenweb.com
Wed Sep 21 18:54:46 CEST 2005
Jeremy Jones wrote:
> Ed Hotchkiss wrote:
>>I'm new to Python, not programming. I agree with the point regarding
>>the interpreter. what is that? who uses that!? Why are most examples
>>like that, rather than executed as .py files?
> I think showing examples at the Python interpreter prompt is *very*
> helpful and IMHO a preferred method in plenty of cases. If I'm showing
> someone a piece of code that returns some object the type of which
> you're not really that familiar with, would you rather be running it in
> a script, or on a command prompt (or, my preference is to either copy
> and paste the example to a script an run it with ``python -i`` or paste
> it to an edit in IPython)? With IPython (or vanilla Python interpreter
> with parse-and-bind tab completion turned on), you can inspect the
> object quite easily. Again, IMHO, much easier than from a script.
>>Another problem that I have (which does get annoying after awhile), is
>>not using foo and bar. Spam and Eggs sucks. It's not funny, although
>>Monty Python does rock. Why not use silly+walks instead.
> Eh. Life's too short for me to get up in a roar about such as this.
> And Python's too good of a language for me to be overly bothered by
> example naming conventions. YMMV.
Jim Hugunin's keynote speech at this year's PyCon was accompanied by a
projection if his interactive interpreter session, and I know I wasn't
alone in finding this a convincing example of Microsoft's (well, Jim's,
really) full integration of Python into the .net framework.
Modules are good, but the interactive interpreter is a brilliant way to
show off what modules can do.
As for "Why not foo and bar rather than spam and eggs?", all I can think
of to say is "Get over it".
Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com
PyCon TX 2006 www.pycon.org
More information about the Python-list