On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 05:00:20 -0700
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
#> Slawomir Nowaczyk wrote:
#> >
#> > I must admit I do not get this "indicate intentions twice" argument,
#> > even though I heard it a number of times now... It's not that braces
#> > require more work or more typing or something, after all -- at least
#> > not if one is using a decent editor.
#>
#> Its not the typing, its the fact that when you say the same thing
#> twice, there is the potential for them to get out of sync.
Which, in my book, is the *right* thing... if I see a wrongly indented
piece of code, that's a good sign that it needs to be checked. It's
the same principle as in "if documentation and code disagree, both are
probably wrong."
YMMV, of course.
#> If the method the compiler uses (braces) and the method the human
#> uses (indentation) to determine what the code does don't agree,
#> then a reader will be likely to misunderstand what it will actually
#> do.
Well, not in my experience. In my experience, such discrepancies
usually only show up in places where something bad happens anyway.
#> One of the driving principles behind Python is that, because code
#> will be read more often than written, readability is more
#> important.
That's exactly my point :)
--
Best wishes,
Slawomir Nowaczyk
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
Today advance is so rapid that even the astronauts who set foot on the
moon in 1969 had never seen a digital watch
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
