> > You're not a lunatic. > > We, and Python itself, change quite readily. > > Neither of those mean your ideas in this instance have merit.
You're right, these premises don't lead to this conclusion. Neither do they lead to its negation, of course. As it happens, you're wrong on both counts. I do in fact suffer from a mental illness and have spent a week in a psych ward, so am a lunatic by some reasonable definitions. Python readily changes in some regards, but not in others. Of course, a great many things of worth have this as one of their essential qualities. Pithy replies are fun. > Thanks for your opinion. I disagree strongly: I think its influence is > nicely balanced by the other important principles that are also > followed. This isn't just being clever, there's substance here. A clearly stated opposing position, with a decent if somewhat short justification. I think you're right insofar as you go - that if someone really sits down, and thinks clearly about all the Pythonic principles, as a whole, and in detail, then the net result in the shaping their thinking will be positive more often than not. Perhaps we're just looking at an instance of a wider problem - smart people boil good ideas down into short slogans, which are nice and memorable and somewhat helpful, but can lead to bad consequences when lots of others start overusing or misunderstanding them. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
