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

Rhodri James rhodri at wildebst.demon.co.uk
Thu Jan 15 04:42:08 CET 2009


On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 09:09:37 -0000, Russ P. <Russ.Paielli at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, that would indeed be nice. I am certainly not the only one who
> could use a language that is excellent for both research prototyping
> *and* the final, safety-critical system. Then perhaps the prototype
> could just be cleaned up and "hardened" for the end product rather
> than rewritten in another language -- by programmers in another state
> who may fail to understand many of the details that the prototype
> developer agonized over.

You should always plan on throwing away your prototype anyway (though
few people do), because *something* in the architecture will turn out
to be not what you thought.  And if the programmers in the other state
fail to understand the details, maybe the developer should have
documented a whole lot more (he says through gritted teeth, having
had the original code as the sole documentation far too many times).

We return you to your regularly scheduled original point...

-- 
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste Herder to the Masses



More information about the Python-list mailing list