Confessions of a Python fanboy

Robert Kern robert.kern at
Thu Jul 30 19:06:31 EDT 2009

On 2009-07-30 16:44, r wrote:
> On Jul 30, 4:29 pm, Emmanuel Surleau<emmanuel.surl... at>
> wrote:
>>> 1.) No need to use "()" to call a function with no arguments.
>>> Python -->  "obj.m2().m3()" --ugly
>>>    Ruby -->  "obj.m1.m2.m3"  -- sweeet!
>>> Man, i must admit i really like this, and your code will look so much
>>> cleaner.
>> It has benefits - code does look better. It has also significant cons - it is
>> ambiguous.
>> For instance:
>> a = b
>> Is b a variable or a method called without parameter?
> Hello Emanuel,
> Again, who so ever names a method with such a non-descriptive name
> will get whats coming to him. And if you did for some reason use such
> a cryptic name as "b", do yourself (and everyone else) a favor and
> follow it with "()" to denote the method call. Remember when something
> is optional that means you have an option to use it OR not use it.

I believe his point is that it is ambiguous to the compiler, not humans reading 
the code. Python functions and methods are first class objects. They can be 
passed around. If they were auto-called, then you could not do this.

Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
  that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
  an underlying truth."
   -- Umberto Eco

More information about the Python-list mailing list