On Apr 5, 5:51 pm, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nate Finch wrote: > > I think you're all going about this the wrong way. There's no reason > > to *always* have one class per file. However, there's also no reason > > to have 1600 lines of code and 50 classes in one file either. > > It's really an operating system thing. We think of programs as > living in text files, manipulated by programs which are basically text > editors. Python has that implicit assumption. There have been > systems that didn't work that way, in which the program source was > manipulated within the language environment, in a more structured > fashion. Smalltalk, LISP, and (wierdly) Forth environments have been > built that way. But it never really caught on. > > The assumption that programs are text files is deeply embedded in > programming culture, so deeply that it's seldom questioned. Programs > are the last refuge of non-rich media. You can't even embed an image > in your program; it has to be in some completely separate file. > > Interestingly, PHP breaks this model; PHP programs are web pages. > They may be on to something. > > John Nagle
Some languages (Specman e, and I think Perl), have the concept of begin and end end markers. The interpreted/compiled code is what is seen between those markers allowing the source to be embedded in other text. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
