Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?
aleax at mac.com
Sat Jun 16 07:25:38 CEST 2007
Neil Cerutti <horpner at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2007-06-12, Antoon Pardon <apardon at forel.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> > On 2007-06-11, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
> >> More so than supporters of most other languages, in particular
> >> Scheme?
> > Well to my knowledge (which could be vastly improved), scheme
> > doesn't have some Zen-rules that include something like this.
> > I tried to google for similar remarks in relation to scheme but
> > I got no results. Maybe your google skills are better.
> It's in _The Revised^%d Report on Scheme_, Introduction:
> Programming languages should be designed not by piling feature
> on top of feature, but by removing the weaknesses and
> restrictions that make additional features appear necessary.
> Of course, that was written well before Scheme had most of its
> current features.
The "Spirit of C" section in the preface of the ISO Standard for C
phrases this principle as "Provide only one way to do an operation".
Despite the phrasing variations, this commonality goes well with my
perception that, at their roots, Scheme, C and Python share one
philosophical underpinning (one that's extremely rare among programming
languages as a whole) -- an appreciation of SIMPLICITY AND UNIFORMITY as
More information about the Python-list