Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: BartC Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: The Cost of Dynamism (was Re: Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 18:39:34 +0000 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <56e44258$0$1598$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <8737rvxs89.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87y49muoh6.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87k2l4ex24.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 18:36:29 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cf45b3961a050227b1103bebc3cbc15a"; logging-data="1676"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/U4ALId+D192yPwQ6UJCgk" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 In-Reply-To: <87k2l4ex24.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> Cancel-Lock: sha1:V5zMj6QfFXs2zjDZIHiqOZJESj0= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:104854 On 14/03/2016 18:25, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > BartC : > >> (Code-smell to me means code dominated by loads of classes, especially >> for no good reason. But I'm not suggesting a language shouldn't have >> them.) > > Ok, you don't like OO. Fine. Python is deep in OO. > > "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." > > Personally, I think OO is quite a cromulent paradigm. I've looked up cromulent but I'm still note sure whether you like OO or not! (For myself, I've actually implemented some OO features, partly because you tend to end up there as a natural progression of language design. But I use them sparingly. It's other people's use of it I object to...) -- Bartc