On 2007-06-01, Warren Stringer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> This discussion has gone in more circles than Earth has gone >> 'round the Sun, but it seems you should consider the >> following: > > Yes, I've been feeling a bit dizzy
No comment. >> 1) Sequences and functions serve fundamentally different purposes in >> Python. One is for containing objects, the other is for executing an >> action. (And yes, I'm aware that these concepts can differ in other >> contexts. But we're talking about Python.) > > I guess I've been arguing for fewer semantics, not more What does that mean? The words you type are English, and the grammar is OK, but the sentences don't seem to _mean_ anything. >> 2) It seems--at least to me--a bit dubious to change an entire general >> purpose programming language to suit a very limited--and frankly >> strange--use case. > > Agreed. > >> 3) You'd probably be better off making a very simple and concise >> domain specific language. > > Hence: http://muse.com/tr3/Tr3%20Overview.pdf > > I'm going to take Steve Holden's advice and hang out at c.l.py Oh, for Pete's sake, you ARE in c.l.py. [You may be reading it via an e-mail gateway, but reading it via an NNTP server isn't going to make any difference.] -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! MY income is ALL at disposable! visi.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
