I think most of the people here aren't reading c.l.py, so here are some feelings from "the community" -- Moshe Zadka <moshez@math.huji.ac.il> There is no IGLU cabal. http://advogato.org/person/moshez ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:14:34 GMT From: Shae Erisson <shapr@uab.edu> To: python-list@python.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: was Re: Type inference now simplicity Neil Hodgson wrote: > I found this article quite depressing. One of the effects of .NET appe= ars > to be the homogenisation of programming languages. When the platform > emphasises compilation, compiler helpful warts like variable declaration = and > "option fast" start appearing. There is a place for languages with option= al > typing but there is also a place for a language that tries to stay very > simple. >=20 > VB has been on a long journey of complexification which has been great > for many but has left some people behind. One of my mates works as a > manager/bureaucrat - programming isn't a significant part of his job but > over the years he's been able to write bits of dBase, Excel macros and HT= ML > with embedded JavaScript. Excel moved from a simple macro language to a > simplified VB variant (OK, so far) to using full VB (getting worse) and t= hen > VB starts gaining C++ features (bad). So this bloke has stopped programmi= ng > in Excel - just too hard now. Adding 'programming in the large' features > appears good to help the more advanced users but it introduces unwanted > complexity for others. JavaScript was the last refuge of simplicity but n= ow > Microsoft (and Netscape) are moving it into the same zone as Python, VB a= nd > C#. I expect a new simple language will appear, gain some users and then > embark on the same journey to complexity. I agree with this. With Python, I'm opposed to the idea of adding autoincrement operators like +=3D etc. I'm opposed to adding the extra for loop stuff like "for [x,y,z] in [a,b,c]." And I'm opposed to it because it seems like sugar to me. I've always loved Python's simplicity, and I hope it stays that way. Adding new operators and new syntax will make Python harder to read, and harder to learn. I don't want that. Simplicity always seems to improve things. Usually, I can improve by removing rather than adding. Concepts like WikiWiki, Refactoring, etc. appeal to me tremendously. --=20 Shae Matijs Erisson - http://www.webwitches.com/~shae/ VirtualPairProgramming Wanted - Linux/Emacs/Python/Speak Freely =2Efi: rakastan ohjelmointia - python kengitt=E4=E4 aasia --=20 http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
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