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

James Mills prologic at shortcircuit.net.au
Wed Jan 14 03:36:11 CET 2009


On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Paul Rubin
<"http://phr.cx"@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> "James Mills" <prologic at shortcircuit.net.au> writes:
>> You do realize this is a model and not strictly a requirement. Quite
>> a few things in Python are done merely by convention.
>> Don't get caught up.
>
> But, if something is done by convention, then departing from the
> convention is by definition unconventional.  If you do something
> unconventional in a program, it could be on purpose for a reason, or
> it could be by accident indicating a bug.
>
> I don't understand why some folks spew such violent rhetoric against
> the idea of augmenting Python with features to alert you automatically
> when you depart from the convention, so that you can check that the
> departure is actually what you wanted.  A lot of the time, I find, the
> departures are accidental and automated checks would save me
> considerable debugging.

Amen to that! Finally someone with some sense and
his/her head screwed on properly! :)

Kudos to your thoughtful post :)

cheers
James



More information about the Python-list mailing list