Cristian a écrit : (snip) > To me, the biggest setback for new programmers is the different syntax > Python has for creating functions. Instead of the common (and easy to > grasp) syntax of foo = bar
It's actually a mostly *un*common syntax when it comes to functions. The only "mainstream" language I know allowing such a syntax is javascript. Now given python's parsing rules, I wonder how this could be implemented... > Python has the def foo(): syntax. So, when > a new programmer is first introduced to functions they are immediately > confronted with the notion that functions are "different". Which is the case in most non functional languages. > After all, > they have their own special syntax. This seems to only further the > separation newbies make between "data" and "functions" or "stuff" and > "actions". Now, the vast majority of us learned this dichotomy when we > first began to program, so we are ingrained to assume and even expect > a different syntax for function declaration, but in a program like > Python there doesn't seem to be any other reason to have it. Technically, I'd say "patsing rules". From a more conceptual POV, Python was meant to be the missing link between shell scripts and C - and some design choices clearly (IMHO) came from the desire to look familiar enough to C programmers. Even if Python ended up with some (restricted) support for functional programming, it's still has it's roots in procedural programming. > Furthermore, I think it actually inhibits the learning of the > uninitiated. We can, of course, keep the current syntax as sugar. > > To someone who's learning to program wouldn't a syntax like the > further give them all they need and also reinforces the idea that > functions are data just like everything else? Python's functions are *objects* like anything else. And objects are more than data. My 2 cents: show your friend that Python's functions are objects, and that other objects can be callable too... > my_function = function(foo, bar): pass > an_instance_method = function(self, foo): pass > a_method_declaration = method(self, foo): pass > > The last one is mostly my pet peeve of having Python "magically" > create methods out of (what is essentially) a function declaration. There's not much magic in this. What's stored as an attribute of the class *is* a function. It's only wrapped in a method object when looked up. And FWIW, it's the function object itself that takes care of this, thanks to the descriptor protocol (all relevant doc is on python.org). > When I first learned it, it felt wrong but you had to press through it > because there was really no other way of declaring methods. Truth is that you do *not* "declare" methods in Python. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
