Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #46421 > unrolled thread

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

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2013-05-29 17:24 -0700
    Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 16:15 -0700

#46421 — Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax?

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Ma Xiaojun <damage3025@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, list.
>
> For the core language, I have mixed feeling. On one hand, I find that
> Python has some sweet feature that is quite useful. On the other hand,
> I often find Pyhton snippets around hard to understand. I admit that I
> never learned Python very formally; I've programmed in many other
> languages already.
>
> Code snippets in BASIC or Pascal seems quite obvious to understand
> (Unless I don't understand the algorithm) .
>

I'm finding it kind of hard to imagine not finding Python's syntax and
semantics pretty graceful.

About the only thing I don't like is:

   var = 1,

That binds var to a tuple (singleton) value, instead of 1.

Oh, and method decorators seem much more complex than they should've been.

But on the whole, python is a pretty beautiful language.  It's not just
another rehash of Pascal though; if that's what you want you might be
better off looking elsewhere.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#46555

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:24:48 PM UTC-5, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> About the only thing I don't like is:
> 
>    var = 1,
> 
> That binds var to a tuple (singleton) value, instead of 1.

I don't understand why Python needs tuples anyway; at least not tuple literals!. I mean, i like the idea of a sequence type that is immutable as much as the next fella, however, i just hate the fact that we had to pay for this type with syntactical multiplicity only to be forever a slave to it's resulting quirkiness! Psst: Guido, i think you got screwed! 

(And they thought Jack was a fool for acquiring those beans!) 

With the demand for type literals growing all the larger as time goes on and the ASCII char set remaining static, there must be a better way! (And no folks, I'm not suggesting space cadet keyboards!) 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web