On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 02:24 pm, Chris Angelico wrote: > > >> This is how you're currently evaluating Python. Instead of starting >> with the most simple and obvious code > > One problem is that what counts as "simple and obvious" depends on what you > are used to. Coming from a background of Pascal, iterating over a list like > this: > > for i in range(len(mylist)): > print mylist[i] > > was both simple and obvious. It took me years to break myself of that habit. > > Likewise clearing a list: > > for i in range(len(mylist)-1, -1, 0): > del mylist[i] > > > Fortunately I didn't need to do that very often. > > The point is that you, like most of the prominent posters here, have many > years of experience in programming in Python. How do you expect Bart to > come up with the same "simple and obvious" code as you?
I don't, until it's pointed out. At that point, someone who respects the language will at least pay *some* heed to the changed recommendations; what we're seeing here is that he continues to use C idioms and then complain that Python is slow. I don't expect him to magically know what Python idioms are, but when the thread has gone on this long and he's still showing the same style of code, that's when I start to agree with Ben that he's not paying heed to Pythonic vs non-Pythonic. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
