Michael Urman a écrit : > On 6/11/07, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Because the existence of these library modules does not make it >> impossible to reliably read source code. We're talking about >> changing the definition of the language here, which is deeper >> than adding or removing things in the library. > > This has already been demonstrated to be false - you already cannot > visually inspect a printed python program and know what it will do. > There is the risk of visually aliased identifiers, but how is that > qualitatively worse than the truly conflicting identifiers you can > import with a *, or have inserted by modules mucking with > __builtins__? > Oh come on! imports usually are located at the top of the file, so they won't clobber other names. And mucking with __builtins__ is rare and frowned upon. On the contrary, non-ASCII identifiers will be encouraged, anywhere in the code. The amount of information you get from today's python code is most of the time sufficient for debugging, or for using it as an inspiration. With non-ASCII identifiers, these features will be lost to all users who cannot read the needed characters. Denying the problem is not a good way to answer other people's concerns.
Cheers, BC _______________________________________________ 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
