Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.albasani.net!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 09:07:29 -0700
From: Gary Herron <gherron@digipen.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: anomaly
References: <CAMjeLr--RfnfgWc1hdOcHiEBpq3QwC7SZk-m14wM65JtpbgMLQ@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.318.1431276220.12865.python-list@python.org> <c681b3ce-2727-4aa9-ad8a-369c662395a3@googlegroups.com> <554F9525.5040101@digipen.edu> <5550815E.5080600@rece.vub.ac.be> <miq0vh$tdg$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.352.1431344390.12865.python-list@python.org> <5550a1d4$0$13013$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5550B0CF.208@rece.vub.ac.be> <CAPTjJmpHqXJz-DsJHxy9Vc8eg7uOVY6QCVuV1KHy8wZrc=EH2g@mail.gmail.com> <5551EA40.2000606@rece.vub.ac.be>
In-Reply-To: <5551EA40.2000606@rece.vub.ac.be>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040706030000030408050400"
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.401.1431446860.12865.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 103
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:90463

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040706030000030408050400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 05/12/2015 04:55 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 11-05-15 om 16:13 schreef Chris Angelico:
>
>> Why does Python have most built-ins as simply looked-up names that can
>> be overridden? Because otherwise, there would be a veritable ton of
>> keywords:
> But that doesn't answer the question why the developers chose "True" to be a
> keyword and "int" to be a looked-up name.
>
> and pretending to justify that choice by stating that the python thought
> is: We're all adults here, if you want to override a builtin, who are we
> to stop you. That is disingenuous.
>

Bull.   Some design decisions were made with the knowledge that

  * they provide a freedom which may be useful but can be misused (e.g.,
    shadowing builtins), versus
  * they would be too disruptive of abusable (e.g. shadowing keywords)

Python tends to use the first category more than C family languages, and 
that's where the "We're all adults" argument applies.  You may argue 
about which category any particular feature ought to fall into, and in 
fact several things (shadowing None, True, and False) have changed 
category during the evolution of Python.  But to imply that the "adult" 
argument should drive *all* decisions is foolish. And disingenuous.

-- 
Dr. Gary Herron
Department of Computer Science
DigiPen Institute of Technology
(425) 895-4418


--------------040706030000030408050400
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252"
      http-equiv=3D"Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000">
    <div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">On 05/12/2015 04:55 AM, Antoon Pardon
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite=3D"mid:5551EA40.2000606@rece.vub.ac.be" type=3D"cite=
">
      <pre wrap=3D"">Op 11-05-15 om 16:13 schreef Chris Angelico:

</pre>
      <blockquote type=3D"cite">
        <pre wrap=3D"">Why does Python have most built-ins as simply look=
ed-up names that can
be overridden? Because otherwise, there would be a veritable ton of
keywords:
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <pre wrap=3D"">
But that doesn't answer the question why the developers chose "True" to b=
e a
keyword and "int" to be a looked-up name.

and pretending to justify that choice by stating that the python thought
is: We're all adults here, if you want to override a builtin, who are we
to stop you. That is disingenuous.

</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Bull.=A0=A0 Some design decisions were made with the knowledge that <=
br>
    <ul>
      <li>they provide a freedom which may be useful but can be misused
        (e.g., shadowing builtins), versus</li>
      <li>they would be too disruptive of abusable (e.g. shadowing
        keywords)</li>
    </ul>
    Python tends to use the first category more than C family languages,
    and that's where the "We're all adults" argument applies.=A0 You may
    argue about which category any particular feature ought to fall
    into, and in fact several things (shadowing None, True, and False)
    have changed category during the evolution of Python.=A0 But to imply=

    that the "adult" argument should drive *all* decisions is foolish.=A0=
=A0
    And disingenuous.=A0 <br>
    <pre class=3D"moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
Dr. Gary Herron
Department of Computer Science
DigiPen Institute of Technology
(425) 895-4418
</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------040706030000030408050400--