Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #43465
| References | <mailman.429.1365635789.3114.python-list@python.org> <51678b94$0$29977$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <roy-E3B2B9.10194712042013@news.panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API |
| From | David M Chess <chess@us.ibm.com> |
| Date | 2013-04-12 11:37 -0400 |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.527.1365781666.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
> Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> > 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 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. I may have some lingering Java smell myself, although I've been working mostly in Python lately, but my reaction here is that's really I don't know "BASIC smell" or something; a class that contains a single static method and nothing else isn't wonderful Java design style either. > 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. That's as true in my C++ > code as it is in my Python. Definitely. > Once you start having state (i.e. data) and behavior (i.e. functions) in > the same thought, then you need a class. If you find yourself passing > the same bunch of variables around to multiple functions, that's a hint > that maybe there's a class struggling to be written. And I think equally to the point, even if you have only data, or only functions, right now, if the thing in question has that thing-like feel to it :) you will probably find yourself with both before you're done, so you might as well make it a class now... DC
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Functional vs. Object oriented API Max Bucknell <mpwb500@york.ac.uk> - 2013-04-11 00:16 +0100
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-12 04:20 +0000
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-12 10:19 -0400
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API Mitya Sirenef <msirenef@lightbird.net> - 2013-04-12 10:29 -0400
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API David M Chess <chess@us.ibm.com> - 2013-04-12 11:37 -0400
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-04-12 22:25 -0700
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-04-12 22:25 -0700
Re: Functional vs. Object oriented API Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2013-04-13 09:51 +0100
csiph-web