Python is readable
Sat Mar 17 20:59:34 CET 2012
On 3/16/2012 17:48, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:10:12 +0100, Kiuhnm wrote:
>> Maybe we should define *exactly* what readability is (in less then 500
>> lines, if possible).
> If you can't be bothered to read my post before replying, save yourself
> some more time and don't bother to reply at all.
> I quote from the part of the my post you deleted:
> When people talk about readability, they normally mean to
> ask how much mental effort is needed to interpret the
> meaning of the text, not how much time does it take to
> pass your eyes over the characters. In other words they
> are actually talking about comprehensibility.
> Unless I've made a mistake counting, that's less than 500 lines.
>> According to your view, ASM code is more readable than Python code. It's
>> just that there's more to read in ASM.
> What a ridiculous misrepresentation of my position. Readability is not
> proportional to length.
Ok, so length and readability are orthogonal properties.
Could you please explain to me in which way
mov eax, 3
should be less readable than
for i in x: print(i)
More information about the Python-list