Re: [pyweb-il:1050] Python coding question
guy keren <choo <at> actcom.co.il>
2010-07-01 14:57:55 GMT
next you'll be advocating special keyboards with extra keys for these
what do you want to turn us into, IBM mainframe APL programmers?
Dov Grobgeld wrote:
> The use of assigment through left arrow (←) would solve this. Which
> reminds me of the fact that I would have loved having a language like
> python that uses more of unicode for its syntax.
> Then "python" might look like:
> ∀ n ∈ names:
> if n ≠ "foo":
> α ← n
> ß = re∘search〈"foo", α〉
> No more overloading of parens, decimal dots, minus signs, etc.
> Of course it would take some time to learn how to type all these chars
> on the keyboard, but by some clever editors macro tricks, you would
> quickly get over this.
> Here's another pythonic construct that imo would look nicer.
> f← λ x: x↑2
> But I'm dreaming. Nobody will ever do anything as crazy as this... ☺
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 15:28, Amit Aronovitch <aronovitch <at> gmail.com
> <mailto:aronovitch <at> gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Ahik Man <ahik.man <at> gmail.com
> <mailto:ahik.man <at> gmail.com>> wrote:
> What do you think about this code:
> for n in range(2, 10):
> ... for x in range(2, n):
> ... if n % x == 0:
> ... print n, 'equals', x, '*', n/x
> ... break
> ... else:
> ... # loop fell through without finding a factor
> ... print n, 'is a prime number'
> I don't like this 'for - else' trick. IMHO it's confusing
> and not readable.
> I really like this (very natural) programmatial construct.
> I use it all the time, and feel handicapped in languages such as C,
> where you have to define an extra boolean flag and manually
> set/check it to achieve the same result.
> As for the choice of keywords, it is not that bad (maybe just got
> used to it after years of usage), but I agree the semantics might
> not be obvious to unaware readers. Certainly not up to Python's
> praised readability standards.
> Personally, I don't like the choice of '=' as the syntactical
> marker for name-binding. It makes people think it is an operator,
> and expect c-like semantics. Source of endless bugs for newbies and
> repeated misunderstandings in mailing lists.
> Well, the advantage of having a BDFL is that someone is in charge
> of making such choices and we do not have to argue about this any
> more. Only other option is to try to keep everyone happy by
> supporting several versions of the syntax (works fine in Perl, but
> takes its toll in readability and/or learning-curve).
> Python-il mailing list
> Python-il <at> hamakor.org.il <mailto:Python-il <at> hamakor.org.il>
> Python-il mailing list
> Python-il <at> hamakor.org.il
Python-il mailing list
Python-il <at> hamakor.org.il