Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > Actually, I couldn't care less about #1 or #2. Paul and I hold our own > > against Perl folks every day =), and I'm not a fan of pure-OO'ness. I > > do try to make _learning_ Python as easy as possible, and > > inconsistencies such as this one do get in the way. > > This one seems to be something that you stumble over once, and then > get used to. I don't disagree, but people have said the same thing about case-sensitivity, integer division, and Perl. =) > > People who learn the language ask things like "how do I make a copy of > > something?" and the answer to that is currently quite complicated. It > > just gets in the way, and it wastes synapses. > > Maybe they are asking the wrong question. I think that copying isn't > all that important in Python -- that's why it's in a module. I'm tired of this argument, so I'll quit. I'll just say that IMO students can't ask the wrong questions. The body of knowledge that they bring to the table is perfectly valid. They're trying to 'grok' a large complicated system, and the questions they ask reflect steps in understanding. FWIW, I only talk about copying after I've discussed references in depth, since that makes the argument you mention more convincing. I only half buy the argument myself, however, since the elegance of the presentation is always marred by having to explain such oddities, no matter how smoothly I finagle it. I see much of Python's recent evolution as getting rid of wrinkles in the system. I just pointed out a wrinkle, that's all. Note that I started with a question, and I'll accept that you don't want to change it. Next topic. --david
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4