On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote: > If Python with braces wouldn't be Python at all, why on earth does the > language even exist?
Every language has its philosophy. Python, as conceived by Guido van Rossum, is a language which (guys, correct me where I'm wrong please!): * Eschews unnecessary syntactic salt * Has "batteries included" * Has a clean and readable syntax To achieve this, Python: * Uses indentation and other whitespace as structural elements (rather than semicolons, braces, etc) * Has a large standard library and an enormous PyPI collection * Uses keywords (and, or, not, if/else) rather than symbols (&, |, !, ?:) for common tasks Etcetera. These are the philosophical decisions made by GvR and the Python community, and these define Python's syntax. If you go against these, you could make something that compiles down to Python's byte code; in fact, I'd say you could make something that produces a .pyc file and then hands it to the regular Python interpreter for execution. Is it Python? No, no more than NetREXX is Java just because it can make a .class file. It's a different language. Pike is very similar to Python in underlying structure. You can pass lists and dictionaries (called arrays and mappings) around as first-class objects, you can reference objects in multiple places, you can work with huge integers comfortably. But they're different in philosophy. Pike's purpose is primarily zero-downtime servers; I can (and do on a daily basis) update parts of the code of a running program, without disconnecting clients. Python doesn't do this, and to make Python do this would violate a lot of its simplicities and underlying referencings. It can be done without modifying the interpreter, but it's never been designed in. If you want that feature, you go to Pike; if you want Python's syntax, you go to Python. I hope I make myself clear, Josephine? ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
