Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax?

Path	csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.etla.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path	<rosuav@gmail.com>
X-Original-To	python-list@python.org
Delivered-To	python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status	OK 0.001
X-Spam-Evidence	'H': 1.00; 'S': 0.00; 'repository': 0.05; 'subject:Python': 0.06; '(b)': 0.07; 'socket': 0.07; 'source.': 0.07; 'essential.': 0.09; 'http': 0.09; 'windows,': 0.09; 'subject:How': 0.10; 'python': 0.11; '"standard': 0.16; 'bit.': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'record,': 0.16; 'rough': 0.16; 'wxpython': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'library': 0.18; "python's": 0.19; 'thu,': 0.19; 'install': 0.23; '(a)': 0.24; 'days,': 0.24; 'enhanced': 0.24; 'package.': 0.24; 'subject:/': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'idea': 0.28; 'chris': 0.29; '(c)': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; 'generally': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'strongly': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; '(which': 0.31; 'there.': 0.32; 'probably': 0.32; 'compatible': 0.32; 'another': 0.32; 'could': 0.34; 'basic': 0.35; "can't": 0.35; 'received:209.85': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'library.': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'two': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.37; 'stable': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'improved': 0.60; 'areas': 0.61; 'simply': 0.61; 'networking': 0.64; 'stand': 0.64; '30,': 0.65; 'apt-get': 0.84; 'everywhere.': 0.84; '2013': 0.98
DKIM-Signature	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=TT/jDAA8hCLS/bV/XvVObdKtvIP4a5XmrM3WOWaQKoU=; b=N2Xc99Akpd7DdRkwv/gpbzAOGRmvd56kniUiRjWy7SNxaM8UhBn68MKlxlbkpi1f6P jIcKmG7h+nFqPByevK6hWTXhi9TVLQLa8vys3zb2Fsyvx6QGKlaQ/erH7ftu4x64CqWN T+r6v567QFdoLyFqEVNOt8iPLypKIJd/XycoAybyw1z6VY9S8nuiSCCy/WKt60ROIqO7 sXaiotAnurPpvgZPv8BAqJXwJorEA8GInyktoX7TtZpYS2ygbdyOQQZhoX82vpSai1oJ z6AMD5TZshHQp6FhLNVsAbkE0J0DGG5yuoL5aVej47ZN4Kerh+e1noBzv6pu/N06+4fB gNPQ==
MIME-Version	1.0
X-Received	by 10.67.4.196 with SMTP id cg4mr6246690pad.117.1369886269898; Wed, 29 May 2013 20:57:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To	<ko5qbe$816$1@news.albasani.net>
References	<CAGVx7UWXAFHSHq37Ep-Vk=cM2wYrEGHSUhNc8s43bCvj_VcVow@mail.gmail.com> <CAGVx7UXHfdMSL18q1bz4OWyz_rYirogJa7++VarBfDSd0BReQw@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.2376.1369853687.3114.python-list@python.org> <ko5qbe$816$1@news.albasani.net>
Date	Thu, 30 May 2013 13:57:49 +1000
Subject	Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax?
From	Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To	python-list@python.org
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-BeenThere	python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version	2.1.15
Precedence	list
List-Id	General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive	<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post	<mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help	<mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.2393.1369886274.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines	31
NNTP-Posting-Host	2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace	1369886274 news.xs4all.nl 15961 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:41291
X-Complaints-To	abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.python:46429

Show key headers only | View raw

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Walter Hurry <walterhurry@lavabit.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 04:54:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> GUIs and databasing are two of the areas where I
>> think Python's standard library could stand to be improved a bit.
>> There are definitely some rough edges there.
>
> Dunno what you mean about "standard library", but I'm very happy with
> wxPython and psycopg2 for GUIs and databasing respectively.

They are not part of the standard library. Yes, Python is strongly
enhanced by additional packages off PyPI, but that's not the same
thing; if I publish a program that requires psycopg2, I can't simply
say "go get Python from your OS's repository or python.org", I have to
also instruct people to install another package. On Debian, I can
simply apt-get python-psycopg2, which I would trust to be (a) a stable
build, (b) compatible with the apt-gettable python (which is 2.7.3;
ditto python3-psycopg2 and python3, for 3.2.3), and (c) from an
authoritative source. There's probably a way to do this for other
Linuxes too, but I don't know the exact package names everywhere. And
on Windows, I have no idea what the best way would be.

These days, networking is considered essential. Python's standard
library includes basic sockets, HTTP (client and server), etc. AFAIK
Python doesn't have obscurities like DNS (obviously you can connect a
socket by hostname, but you can't look up an SPF record, nor can you
write a DNS server), but networking generally is considered important
enough to be inbuilt. Why is databasing second-class?

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 04:54 +1000
  Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Walter Hurry <walterhurry@lavabit.com> - 2013-05-29 21:01 +0000
    Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 13:57 +1000

csiph-web