Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!nerim.net!novso.com!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.017 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.97; '*S*': 0.00; 'patterns': 0.04; 'static': 0.04; 'class,': 0.07; 'coding,': 0.09; 'python:': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'mouth.': 0.16; 'received:74.55.86': 0.16; 'received:74.55.86.74': 0.16; 'received:smtp.webfaction.com': 0.16; 'received:webfaction.com': 0.16; 'roy': 0.16; 'screen,': 0.16; 'subject:API': 0.16; 'subject:Object': 0.16; 'subject:oriented': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'do.': 0.18; 'trying': 0.19; 'later': 0.20; 'coding': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'dinner': 0.24; 'skip:l 30': 0.24; 'initial': 0.24; 'java': 0.24; 'looks': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'am,': 0.29; 'room': 0.29; 'said,': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'hacker': 0.31; 'received:192.168.1.3': 0.31; 'class': 0.32; 'open': 0.33; 'noticed': 0.34; 'could': 0.34; "can't": 0.35; 'classes': 0.35; 'knows': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'bought': 0.36; 'method': 0.36; 'being': 0.38; 'problems': 0.38; 'initially': 0.38; 'somebody': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'around.': 0.60; 'everybody': 0.60; 'interview': 0.61; 'kind': 0.63; 'real': 0.63; 'soon': 0.63; 'our': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'worth': 0.66; 'subject:. ': 0.67; 'smith': 0.68; 'walk': 0.74; 'applicants': 0.83; 'giveaway': 0.84; 'investment.': 0.84; 'absolutely': 0.87; 'regret': 0.91 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:29:45 -0400 From: Mitya Sirenef User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API References: <51678b94$0$29977$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 28 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1365776990 news.xs4all.nl 2619 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:59268 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:43454 On 04/12/2013 10:19 AM, Roy Smith wrote: > As part of our initial interview screen, we give applicants some small > coding problems to do. One of the things we see a lot is what you could > call "Java code smell". This is our clue that the person is really a > Java hacker at heart who just dabbles in Python but isn't really fluent. > It's kind of like how I can walk into a Spanish restaurant and order > dinner or enquire where the men's room is, but everybody knows I'm a > gringo as soon as I open my mouth. > > It's not just LongVerboseFunctionNamesInCamelCase(). Nor is it code > that looks like somebody bought the Gang of Four patterns book and is > trying to get their money's worth out of the investment. The real dead > giveaway is when they write classes which contain a single static method > and nothing else. > > That being said, I've noticed in my own coding, it's far more often that > I start out writing some functions and later regret not having initially > made it a class, than the other way around. I've absolutely noticed the same thing for myself, over and over again. I can't remember writing a class that I've regretted is not a few functions, although it must have happened a few times. -m -- Lark's Tongue Guide to Python: http://lightbird.net/larks/