On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:41:24 -0500, Frank Samuelson wrote: >> The ideas are >> *never* fully thought out or materialized, and they invariably invite >> scorn from the user community. > > Of course, they're thought out: They're stolen from another language. > Specifically, the language in which I am most productive.
No, they aren't fully thought out *at all*. To wit: * you've suggested crippling tracebacks, throwing away the most important piece of information they currently provide, just because you don't like the def statement; * you've suggested allowing sequences as indices into lists, completely unaware that your two suggestions for what it should mean are mutually incompatible; * you've suggested getting rid of the slice syntax for no advantage; * you've suggested making the function constructor itself a function, and seem to be completely unaware that your request would need a very different syntax to that Python already uses; * you suggest two different versions for the function constructor, one that is an expression and one that is a suite, but judging by your comments you don't even realize they are two different versions. Need I go on? If you want your suggestions to be taken seriously, you need to think them through carefully. Well-designed programming languages are not like chop suey, where you grab whatever left-overs you have in the fridge and mix them all together because you like the individual ingredients. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
