On Mar 3, 4:30 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mar 2, 1:18 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Mar 2, 12:01 pm, John DeRosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 01:23:32 +0900, js <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >Hi,
>
> > > >Have you ever seen Beautiful Python code?
> > > >Zope? Django? Python standard lib? or else?
>
> > > >Please tell me what code you think it's stunning.
>
> > > Just about any Python code I look at.
>
> > Decorators, with, and namedtuple.
>
> IMO, decorators are functional but far from beautiful. They're a
> special, somewhat ugly syntax for something that was already handled
> by normal constructs ("foo=classmethod(foo)") that you didn't need
> extra knowledge to understand.
>
> On balance I think it's worth it in order to get those "declarations"
> up by the function defs, but it's sort of a tradeoff of magical non-
> explicitness for pragmatism over purity. A worthwile tradeoff, but
> not what I'd ever call beautiful.
Someone study architecture. What are the Palmer House, the Rookery,
and the Lyric Opera?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
