On Jan 20, 1:39 pm, Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote: > consider code produced by corporations, as opposed to with respect to > some academic or philsophical logical analysis. Looked in another way, > consider if we can compile stat of all existing pyhton code used in > real world, you'll find the above style is rarely used.
I've worked for several corporations that used Python and at -all- of them the developers were not only aware of list comprehensions, they used them regularly. Same with iterators. Not -one- of them found them to be "computer sciency OOP jargons" but useful metaphors that made their code more concise without sacrificing readability. Not everything new is crap, y'know. Neither is everything that you fail to understand the first time you're exposed to it. I find it kinda funny that you constantly criticise "academic" language development when it seems pretty clear from your posts that you've never actually engaged in any practical application-focused development in your life. But as they say: those that can do, those that can't post godawful screeds to their much-hyped-on-usenet vanity blogs... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
