On Jan 30, 8:43 am, Nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:29:05 -0800, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > > Python is much, much cleaner. I don't know how anyone can honestly say > > Ruby is cleaner than Python. > > I'm not familiar with Ruby, but most languages are cleaner than Python > once you get beyond the "10-minute introduction" stage. >
Probably too little, too late (haven't read all of the replies yet...) I judge a language's simplicity by how long it takes to explain the complete language. That is, what minimal set of documentation do you need to describe all of the language? With a handful of statements, and a very short list of operators, Python beats out every language in the Algol family that I know of. I can think of only one language (or rather, a class of languages) that can every hope to be shorter than Python. I doubt you've heard of it based on your comments, but I suggest you look into it. Unfortunately, to fully appreciate that language, you're going to have to study a textbook called "SICP". At the end of that textbook, you are blessed to not only see but understand the complete compiler for the language, in the language itself. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
