Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?
bartc
bc at freeuk.com
Sun Feb 18 21:14:26 EST 2018
On 19/02/2018 00:09, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Sure, but only the most boring, uninteresting kinds of types can be so
> named. The point is that "sufficiently fine-grained types" can be
> arbitrarily complex.
I don't think so.
If a human finds it hard to give it a meaningful
> name, no algorithm will do it either. Consider:
>
> "positive odd integers greater than 10 but less than 15003 divisible by
> 17 except for 850, 867 and 1394; or primes that aren't Mersenne primes".
Is that a type? Or a function? Or a set? Or a constraint?
How would even a type for the odd numbers from 1 to 10 inclusive work?
(That, a type consisting of one of the values in {1,3,5,7,9}.) Would
they be ordered or unordered? Can I do arithmetic with them: will 3*3
work, but not 3*5?
This is where keeping things simple pays off.
--
bartc
More information about the Python-list
mailing list