Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!81.171.118.63.MISMATCH!peer03.fr7!news.highwinds-media.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail From: Antoon Pardon Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Why not allow empty code blocks? Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 10:26:40 +0200 Lines: 35 Message-ID: References: <87vazwppxx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <579B1ABB.1070500@rece.vub.ac.be> <579c2095$0$22142$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <579cbded$0$1605$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <758a1961-00bc-4b1c-834b-a7deca94d029@googlegroups.com> <57A0763F.7050809@rece.vub.ac.be> <57A1AAC0.2030900@rece.vub.ac.be> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 6dE0gREdfd3M6mPTF29ynQM9tJ6vrdrS6/eIG9eZ+/Fw== Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.036 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.93; '*S*': 0.00; 'python,': 0.02; 'received:134': 0.05; 'differently': 0.07; 'subject:code': 0.07; 'subject:Why': 0.09; '\xe2\x80\x94': 0.09; 'python': 0.10; 'subject:not': 0.11; 'received:ac.be': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'subject:allow': 0.16; 'well-known': 0.16; 'beginner': 0.18; 'language': 0.19; 'purposes': 0.20; 'saying': 0.22; 'pascal': 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'right.': 0.27; 'function': 0.28; 'print': 0.30; 'putting': 0.30; 'received:be': 0.30; 'waste': 0.30; 'skip:s 30': 0.31; 'languages': 0.34; 'gets': 0.35; 'next': 0.35; 'could': 0.35; 'quite': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'too': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'structures': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'difference': 0.38; 'data': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'called': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'different': 0.63; 'between': 0.65; 'production.': 0.66; 'talking': 0.67; 'choose': 0.68; 'teaching': 0.69; 'rose': 0.72; 'url:v': 0.72; 'url:youtube': 0.73; 'url:watch': 0.78; 'gap': 0.84; 'limitations.': 0.84; 'pardon': 0.84; 'schreef': 0.84; 'ladies': 0.91; 'serious': 0.97 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2CWEwDvqaFX/0YPuIZdhBtKAbtcASOCQoM3AoISAQEBAQEBXoUGAQUjDwFFEQsaAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBRRMIAogtDq9LjBMagwgBAQgBAQEBHgWBAYUphE2BeoMSgjWCWgWZNIFgjR+JRYV6kCdUg3yJSAEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: A2CWEwDvqaFX/0YPuIZdhBtKAbtcASOCQoM3AoISAQEBAQEBXoUGAQUjDwFFEQsaAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBRRMIAogtDq9LjBMagwgBAQgBAQEBHgWBAYUphE2BeoMSgjWCWgWZNIFgjR+JRYV6kCdUg3yJSAEBAQ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.8.0 In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <57A1AAC0.2030900@rece.vub.ac.be> X-Mailman-Original-References: <87vazwppxx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <579B1ABB.1070500@rece.vub.ac.be> <579c2095$0$22142$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <579cbded$0$1605$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <758a1961-00bc-4b1c-834b-a7deca94d029@googlegroups.com> <57A0763F.7050809@rece.vub.ac.be> X-Received-Bytes: 6431 X-Received-Body-CRC: 4233856990 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:112265 Op 02-08-16 om 14:29 schreef Rustom Mody: > So I was talking of 3 very different levels: > > 1. print x vs print(x) > — a difference too petty for me to waste my time with > > 2. Procedure vs Function as something very necessary for beginner > thinking-ontology which Pascal gets right > > 3. The fact that the gap between a mainly-for-teaching language and a serious > software-engineering-real-world language is not closable > And that saying that the same language could be used for both purposes is > like arguing that both these delightful ladies are pianists: > > > Martha: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLZLp6AcAi4 > Rose : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bjKDJD-CLc > > > Scheme and Pascal happen to be two well-known well-crafted but quite different > for-teaching languages But on what ground is scheme a well-crafted for-teaching language? It is not because it gets the Procedure vs Function ontology right. As far as I know scheme has about the same data structures as python, they are just called differently and there are some limitations. So when putting scheme and python next to each other we should choose scheme for teaching and python for production. -- Antoon Pardon