On 2015-04-16, Blake McBride <blake1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for all the responses. I especially like the Pike pointer.
> To be clear:
>
> 1. I don't think languages should depend on invisible elements to
> determine logic.
I had the same attitude when I first tried Python 15 years ago. But,
Python was the only free language implimentation I could find for
Windows that had all the features to allow me to easily write a
program to suck e-mail messages out of Outlook via DCOM and shove them
over to an SMTP server.
After a few days of use, I was a firm believer in semantically
significant indentation (and have been ever since).
> 2. Having been an employer, it is difficult to force programmers to
> use any particular editor or style. Different editors handle tabs
> and spaces differently. This is all a bloody nightmare with Python.
It's an even _worse_ problem for C, PHP, Javascript, et al. At least
Python requires some semblance of order and method. Those other
languages allow complete anarchy, and any time developer A has to
read/edit code from devloper B, it wastes all sorts of time.
> 3. Languages that use braces (or the like) can be run through a
> program beautifier to correct the indentation.
With Python, there's no need. The indenation is _already_ correct.
> You are just screwed in Python. So, Python may be a cute
> language for you to use as an individual, but it is unwieldy in a
> real development environment.
Ah. That explains why Google uses it so much.
> 4. Language beautifiers used on bracey languages removes all
> arguments in favor of an off-side language.
As trolls go, I don't think this rates much above a C-.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! VICARIOUSLY experience
at some reason to LIVE!!
gmail.com
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
