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

Tim Rowe digitig at
Wed Jan 21 13:11:11 CET 2009

2009/1/21 Paul Rubin <""@nospam.invalid>:

> I have no direct experience with it but have read a little about it.
> It looks to be a fairly vanilla block structured imperative language
> like Pascal with some concurrency stuff added.  The sense I have is
> that it's not especially harder to program in than C or C++, but the
> programs come out much more reliable.

It is rather more than that, in that it's particularly strict (and it
has a particularly powerful arithmetic model), but its roots are
certainly there. At a conference on the safe subset, SPARK Ada, one of
the SPARK developers pointed out that the SPARK Ada subset was
effectively Modula2.

Programs done in Ada are, by objective measures, more reliable than
those done in C and C++ (the very best released C++ programs are about
as good as the worst released Ada programs), although I've always
wondered how much of that is because of language differences and how
much is because Ada tends to be used on critical projects that also
tend to get a lot more attention to development standards.

Tim Rowe

More information about the Python-list mailing list