Martin v. Löwis a écrit : >> Here is what I have to say (to everyone in this discussion, not >> specifically to you, Stephen) in response to said labelling: > > Interestingly enough, we agree on the principles, and just > judge the PEP differently wrt. these principles > >> Many of us value a *predictable* identifier character set. >> Whether "predictable" means ASCII only, or user-selectable, or >> restricted by default, I think we all agree in this sentiment: > > Indeed, PEP 3131 gives a predictable identifier character set. > Adding per-site options to change the set of allowable characters > makes it less predictable. > true. However, this will only matter if you distribute code with non-ASCII identifiers to the wider public. Something that we agree is a bad idea, don't we?
>> We believe that we should try to make it easier, not harder, for >> programmers to understand what Python code says. This has many >> benefits (reliability, readability, transparency, reviewability, >> debuggability). I consider these core strengths of Python. > > Indeed. That was my primary motivation for the PEP: to make > it easier for programmers to understand Python, and to allow > people to write more transparent programs. > The real question is: transparent *to whom*. Transparent to the developper himself when he rereads his own code (which I value as a developper), or transparent to the user of the program when he tries to fix a bug (which I value as a user of open-source software) ? Non-ASCII identifiers are marginally better for the first case, but can be dramatically worse for the second one. Clearly, there is a tradeoff. >> That is what makes these strengths so important. I hope this >> helps you understand why these concerns can't and shouldn't be >> brushed off as "paranoia" -- this really has to do with the >> core values of the language. > > It just seems that the concerns don't directly follow from > the principles. Something else has to be added to make that > conclusion. It may not be paranoia (i.e. excessive anxiety), > but there surely is some fear, no? > That argument is not really honest :-) Every risk can be estimated opimistically or pessimistically. In both cases, there is some part of irrationallity. > Regards, > Martin Cheers, Baptiste _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
