Some "pythonic" suggestions for Python

Bruno Desthuilliers bdesth.quelquechose at free.quelquepart.fr
Fri Nov 9 23:24:35 CET 2007


Frank Samuelson a écrit :
(snip)
>> Arbitrary changes to syntax are never going to fly. It's a lost cause.
> 
> 
> The changes are not arbitrary.

Which ones ?

>  They are logical, consistent, less
> arbitrary and thus more productive.

For who ?

>  If such
> changes are a lost cause, that is too bad, because
> it implies that Python will stagnate.  Unfortunately that appears the case.

This is totally ridiculous. Let's see : list comprehensions, a new, 
widely improved object system, with metaclasses, and the descriptor 
protocol which brings customisable computed attributes -, lexical 
closures, iterators, generator expressions, syntactic sugar for function 
decorators, contexts (the 'with' statement), and coroutines. Just to 
name a few, and only talking of production releases. Which other 
language grew so many new features in the last seven years ? Java ? C ? 
C++ ? Lisp ? VB (lol) ?

(snip)
>> If you can't handle Python without your pet changes, fork it and write
>> your own version and let the marketplace of ideas decide if its
>> useful.
>  
> Apparently you missed my statement about loving Python.  I love it
> because it is the second most productive language I have ever used,
> though I do believe it has the potential to be the greatest ever by
> far.

I don't think you'll gain that much productivity by fighting against the 
language trying to write <whatever-other-language> in it.



More information about the Python-list mailing list