> I misunderstood about the need for parens. I had only been watching the
> thread in python-list with one eye. I thought it was just some python-list
> riff-raff throwing around ideas. Then I saw that Tim was part of the rabble
> ;-). I still didn't notice the "I've implemented it but not yet checked it
> in" bit until someone else did and asked about it. I then went looking for
> a PEP but didn't see one. I hadn't seen any discussion on python-dev
> either. (Maybe I missed it because python-list and python-dev mail wind up
> in the same mailbox.)
OK. I guess you were thinking that the parentheses were required as
for 'if' in C?
> Guido> If I saw a piece of code that read
>
> Guido> x = if if if x == 1 then y else z then p else q then a else b
>
> Guido> I would get a strong urge to commit illegal violence against the
> Guido> author. If on the other hand I saw
>
> Guido> x = if (if (if x == 1 then y else z) then p else q) then a else b
>
> Guido> I might be willing to sit down and figure out what it meant --
> Guido> maybe with the help of a parentheses-balancing command in my
> Guido> editor.
>
> Python's block structured statement syntax keep you from composing just
> monstrosities at the statement level. I'm not sure what makes them more
> appealing at the expression level. How many levels of parens would be
> required before you had a "strong urge to commit illegal violence" against
> someone using a parenthesized conditional expression?
As soon as there is an if inside the condition of the first if. Even
parentheses don't fix this, really.
> I guess that's what it boils down to for me. You can easily write
> much more inscrutable code with the new conditional expression than
> you could before.
"You can write Fortran in any language" -- we've been through this
before. Potential abuse is not enough to prevent it -- likely abuse
is.
> I think that will make Python somewhat less of a CP4E language. I
> don't think it falls into the same category of the more esoteric
> features of the language (generators, metaclasses, __*__ methods,
> etc) that beginners can safely ignore. Conditional expressions are
> pretty basic stuff, and this makes it easier to write fairly
> inscrutable conditional expressions.
It also makes it easier to write what you thinkk, IMO.
> Guido> Sorry, I still don't get this at all. A conditional
> Guido> expression is still an expression. Curly brances are a
> Guido> statement-level concept. What am I missing? Where is
> Guido> the similarity between the use of { } and ( ) in
> Guido> C/Java/C++/Perl?
>
> From the computer's viewpoint, they are syntactically and
> semantically, different, I agree. From the point of view of a human
> trying to understand what's written I think they will serve much the
> same purpose, however. White space is viewed is being essential
> enough to understanding that Python uses it for block structure. In
> particular, I can't nest two compound statements on the same line.
> With this new addition to expressions, it appears you will be able
> to create arbitrarily complex expressions all on one line.
Previous versions of Python in no way impaired your ability to create
arbitrarily complex expressions all on one line.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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