On Mon, 2010-10-25, bruno.desthuilli...@gmail.com wrote: > On 25 oct, 15:34, Alex Willmer <a...@moreati.org.uk> wrote: >> On Oct 25, 11:07 am, kj <no.em...@please.post> wrote: >> >> > In "The Zen of Python", one of the "maxims" is "flat is better than >> > nested"? Why? Can anyone give me a concrete example that illustrates >> > this point? >> >> I take this as a reference to the layout of the Python standard >> library and other packages i.e. it's better to have a module hierarchy >> of depth 1 or 2 and many top level items, than a depth of 5+ and only >> a few top level items. >> > (snip) > > This also applies to inheritance hierarchies (which tend to be rather > flat in Python compared to most mainstreams OOPLs), as well as nested > classes etc.
Which mainstream languages are you thinking of? Java? Because C++ is as flat as Python. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
