Guido van Rossum wrote: >>What's more important is whether this ideas raises interest or >>not. I'm not sure myself whether it's a good idea and that's why I >>posted the idea here. > > > There are lots of possibilities for overgeneralization here. > E.g. most of the examples of the $x"..." syntax are just as easily > done using a function call, either passing a string or a few numbers. > > One danger of new notations is that it could be much harder to find > out what it means if you're not familiar with a program. If you see a > call to Frobozz(1, 2), it usually isn't hard to find the definition of > Frobozz -- at the worst, it's hidden in an "import *", and that's one > reason to avoid those. But if you see $f"1 2" in a file, you may have > to grep all code that is imported by the program containing that file > for calls to sys.register. You're probably right. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH _______________________________________________________________________ eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,... Python Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.egenix.com/files/python/
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