"Michael Tobis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> According to your silly rule the shortest book on a subject would be >> the best. Now why is that false? > > No, according to the rule, the shorter of two books **containing the > same information** would be best.
What is "the same information"? > In fact, that's what makes the comparison interesting. I had always > thought that Pythonistas type more than Perlists, though I prefer > Python anyway. The presumption was based on the fact that Perl (as > language and culture) takes delight in saving keystrokes at the > expense of clarity ($_ and all that) Then you're very mistaken about the Perl culture, or you consider a small group *the* Perl culture, which is also a mistake IMNSHO. I have never see someone recommend unclear Perl code over clear code, except in golf. But we're not talking about golf here. > while Python makes no special effort in > that direction. Nor does Perl. That one can do something doesn't mean one has to do it. > If real world Python code is substantially more terse *despite* this > cultural difference, it is a fact worthy of some note. Maybe you got the Perl culture wrong. I think you do. > Let me add my voice to those clamoring for Edward to release his code > while I'm here, though. Yup, I agree on that. Since I am learning Python (well, I read Dive into Python, and the Python documentation), and have quite some Perl experience, I am curious. Yes, I might comment on the Perl code, but isn't the goal to learn? -- John MexIT: http://johnbokma.com/mexit/ personal page: http://johnbokma.com/ Experienced programmer available: http://castleamber.com/ Happy Customers: http://castleamber.com/testimonials.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
