Does Python really follow its philosophy of "Readability counts"?

[r]

On Jan 12, 3:58 pm, Paul Rubin <http://phr...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
> We are in an era for programming languages sort of like the Windows 95
> era was for operating systems, where everything is broken but some of
> the fixes are beginning to come into view.  So there is no language
> that currently really works the right way, but some of them including
> Python are (one hopes) moving in good directions.  Maybe I can help
> that process along by posting, maybe not.

Paul,
Python is the best hope for readable, maintainable very high-level
coding. Python forged the path and showed all other languages for what
they truly are; archaic, redundant, pieces of complete rubbish! In my
mind only 2 languages stand out in the very high level category;
Python and Ruby. Ruby only exists in this world because of the things
it took from Python. Nobody would touch Ruby without it's Pythonisms.
Python wins hands down, WHY? you ask. Well i could list a thousand
reasons why but i will only cover a few.

1.) read-ability
2.) learn-ability
3.) maintain-ability
4.) perfect choice of keywords
5.) no end statement, braces, or lisps!
6.) no forced capitalizations
7.) modules are the actual script name
8.) introspection
9.) class, and class inheritance is beautiful
8.) true procedural support(no instance vars needed)
10.) loads of quality documentation!
11.) IDLE
12.) Guido (the genius that made all this happen!)

I could keep going for days and days. Python is hands down the best
thing that ever happened to the world of programming. Sure it could
use a few improvements, nothing and nobody is perfect. But can any
language stand toe to toe with Python? HELL NO!