Steve Holden wrote: > It says that Python is already adequately expressive to allow it to > solve all solvable problems: more briefly, "Python can already do > everything". Hence there is no need to change the language. > > Of course I use this as a /reductio ad absurdum/ to try to show you the > falsehood of your position. Sadly I fear this will simply result in > another response which won't move the dialogue forwards. Still don't quite understand what you intend to say.
> > > >>Would you, say, remove "for" loops because they could be written as > >>"while" loops. Don't forget the word "obvious" that appears in that > >>catchphrase ... > >> > > > > If every "for" usage can be done with "while" and that "while" is the > > preferred way, why not ? As I said, the problem is that "obvious" > > really is subjective in many case. And if it really is obvious, it > > really is obvious and I doubt there would be that much disagreement. I > > It seems to me you either don't understand the words "obvious" and > "preferably". My intepretation of "obvious" is that 99 out of 100 people would immediately see that "this is the way to do it". I am not sure your "right meaning" of it. > I believe I have also suggested that the phrases of the Zen aren't to be > taken too literally. You seem to distinguish between "obvious" meaning > "obvious to Steve but not necessarily to me" and "really obvious" > meaning "obvious to both Steve and me". So where does the subjectivity > creep in? And are you going to spend the rest of your life arguing > trivial semantics? Again, don't quite understand what you what to say. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
