newbie: self.member syntax seems /really/ annoying

[Wildemar Wildenburger]

Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:10:03 +0000, timothy.soehnlin at gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> Why not use '_' as the self variable.  It is minimal and achieves close
>> to '.var', as '_.var' isn't that different.  I know its a little
>> perl-esque, but its not a bad convention if you are aiming to up
>> readability of your code.
> 
> I think the definitions of "up" or "readability" you are using are very 
> different from mine. To me, to up something means to increase it, and 
> readability means the ease of comprehension when reading something. You 
> seem to be using the opposite definition for one or the other.
> 
> 
OK, making a pointless reply to pointless reply, but anyway:

I see merit in using

   (_.foo + _.bar) * _.baz

instead of

   (s.foo + s.bar) * s.baz

because I'm trained to interpret the underscore as a synonym for one 
space. It's not particularly beautiful, but that is probably a matter of 
habituation. And that exact word is probably the reason why I'd still 
use self or s (explained by a comment, because I can get very dumb if I 
have to).

It's a matter of taste, so there is no point in bashing a valid suggestion.

/W (I am aware that I'm banging a philosophy on people's heads just as 
Steven did, so I'm no better, I know.)