Why Python???

joeBuffer · 08-30-2009, 08:48 PM

I searched for this thread, trying to figure out where Sergei Steshenko's signature came from.

I have read through a book and some tutorials on PERL, and just a week or so ago started reading "How to Think Like a Computer Scientist: Learning with Python." (I haven't finished it yet.) They both seem to be good languages, but I'm far from being an expert on this subject.
Not being an expert, I would say that PERL seems to me (to put it simply) to be more "heavy-duty" in ways. It seems to me to be more complex, and not just in the syntax.
PERL OOP - and some things about the rest of the language - seems a little messy to me. Not in a permanent sort of way, just in a "this takes a lot of getting used to." sort of way.
Also, I see that Eric Raymond finds Python to be a very good language.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3882

Dan04 · 08-30-2009, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergei Steshenko

Well, even in "C"

Code:

#define UNLESS(cond) if(!(cond))

- any language with macros allows such a trick.

And syntax sugar, well, sometimes is really sweet.

But my point is different - languages evolve, so a claim that if a language doesn't [have] a feature it means it doesn't need it is funny.

True as stated. However, I would agree with the statement "If a language doesn't have a feature and the workaround for the lack of that feature is trivial, then the language doesn't need that feature." I've never felt the need for "unless" in Python (or C++, or Java, or ...) because "if not" works just fine, and doesn't even require more keystrokes than "unless".

Sergei Steshenko · 08-30-2009, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan04

True as stated. However, I would agree with the statement "If a language doesn't have a feature and the workaround for the lack of that feature is trivial, then the language doesn't need that feature." I've never felt the need for "unless" in Python (or C++, or Java, or ...) because "if not" works just fine, and doesn't even require more keystrokes than "unless".

You are on a dangerous path - you have to demand removing 'for' statement because by definition it is implemented through 'while'.

Or, since 'for' is shorter than 'while', demand removing 'while' statement while leaving 'for', which, actually, is the only looping construct one needs.

joeBuffer · 08-30-2009, 11:56 PM

A question for Sergei:
You say "Python's catching up." Do you think that in the future Python might be a better language in your opinion than it is now?
---
http://www.python.org/about/success/

Dan04 · 08-31-2009, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergei Steshenko

You are on a dangerous path - you have to demand removing 'for' statement because by definition it is implemented through 'while'.

I said a trivial workaround. This applies very well in the case of "unless", which can always be easily written as "if not". It takes a little more effort to convert

Code:

for item in iterable:
   print item

to

Code:

iterator = iter(iterable)
while True:
   try:
      item = iterator.next()
      print item
   except StopIteration:
      break

Sergei Steshenko · 08-31-2009, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeBuffer

A question for Sergei:
You say "Python's catching up." Do you think that in the future Python might be a better language in your opinion than it is now?
---
http://www.python.org/about/success/

Yes, why not ?

The point, though, is that Perl 6 is making progress too, and slowly its features even migrate into Perl 5.

Sergei Steshenko · 08-31-2009, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan04

I said a trivial workaround. This applies very well in the case of "unless", which can always be easily written as "if not". It takes a little more effort to convert

Code:

for item in iterable:
   print item

to

Code:

iterator = iter(iterable)
while True:
   try:
      item = iterator.next()
      print item
   except StopIteration:
      break

A trivial thing is to replace 'while' with 'for'.