On Sunday, 12 May 2013 01:33:15 UTC+5:30, Citizen Kant wrote: > Hi, > this could be seen as an extravagant subject but that is not my original > purpose. I still don't know if I want to become a programmer or not. At this > moment I'm just inspecting the environment. I'm making my way to Python (and > OOP in general) from a philosophical perspective or point of view and try to > set the more global definition of Python's core as an "entity". In order to > do that, and following Wittgenstein's indication about that the true meaning > of words doesn't reside on dictionaries but in the use that we make of them, > the starting question I make to myself about Python is: which is the single > and most basic use of Python as the entity it is? I mean, beside programming, > what's the single and most basic result one can expect from "interacting" > with it directly (interactive mode)? I roughly came to the idea that Python > could be considered as an economic mirror for data, one that mainly mirrors > the data the programmer types on its black surface, not exactly as the > programmer originally typed it, but expressed in the most economic way possible. That's to say, for example, if one types >>>1+1 Python reflects >>>2. When data appears between apostrophes, then the mirror reflects, again, the same but expressed in the most economic way possible (that's to say without the apostrophes). > So, would it be legal (true) to define Python's core as an entity that > mirrors whatever data one presents to it (or feed it with) showing back the > most shortened expression of that data? > Don't get me wrong. I can see the big picture and the amazing things that > programmers write on Python, it's just that my question points to the lowest > level of it's existence. > Thanks a lot for your time. I expected some spam but this actually makes some sense.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
