On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 4:56 AM, rantingrick <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmm, that's strange considering that code MUST be formatted in certain > ways or you get a syntax error (indention, colons, parenthesis, etc, > etc). I don't hear the masses claiming that they are going over to > Ruby simply because of indention.
Not Ruby, but to other languages. There's this guy in my house named Chris who tries his best to avoid Python if the code is going to be shared over any "dodgy medium" where indentation might be damaged. There are plenty of other languages that he can use... oh wait, that's me. Yes, I frequently avoid Python specifically because of its indentation issues. Does that mean I never use Python? No. Does it mean I don't post here? Obviously not. Does it mean that further restrictions can automatically be grandfathered in because "there are already restrictions like this"? No. > In my mind doc-strings should ALWAYS be optional HOWEVER if the > programmer decides to create a doc-string THEN he must observe some > syntax rules or his code will throw an SyntaxError. Remember, freedom > is good, unbridled freedom is the root of all evil. 1) Every syntax element MUST add indentation. 2) Strong encouragement to stick to an 80-character line Conclusion: Every big function will become two smaller functions, one of which calls the other. 3) Every function that has a docstring MUST have it fully formatted. Secondary conclusion: The only functions with docstrings are the ones that are meant to be called externally. In other words, docstrings will define the module's interface, and there'll be a whole lot of utterly undocumented functions because they didn't merit this massive structured docstring, and it became way way too much work to factor things out. Either that, or people will just start ignoring the 80 character limit, but I'm sure you could make that mandatory - and that one would actually improve some things, because any program that wants to read Python code needs only allocate an 81-character buffer. > So what's so terrible about structure Chris? Nobody's freedom are > being taken away. You don't HAVE to create doc-strings, just like you > don't HAVE to code with Python (you do free form formatting Ruby). > Python is a language that is meant to be clean. Forced indention makes > that possible. Forced doc-string syntax will complete the circle. Python was also meant to be a programming language. Programming languages offer freedom to their users. Without that freedom, it's not a programming language but a script for another program... such things can be useful, but are not the same. This is not a true programming language: http://www.kongregate.com/games/Coolio_Niato/light-bot It's a reasonably fun game, but specifically _because_ it's so restrictive. That is NOT what I want from a programming language or even a scripting language. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
