> Python is not an OOP language. If you want to breathe and preach OOP, you should quite frankly just use Java.
Python isn't *strictly* or *exclusively* an object-oriented programming language, but since it does have strong support for OOP features, saying that "Python is not an OOP language" simply isn't true. As a highly general purpose language, Python allows its users to choose between paradigms based on unique needs and preferences. I understand where you're coming from here, but I don't think it's particularly productive to push those who have a strong preference for OOP over to Java. Instead, try to explain why you prefer a different paradigm in this particular situation. If you can't see eye-to-eye with the other person, that's perfectly fine, but at least you have the chance of engaging in a productive discussion and perhaps learning a new perspective. On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 3:10 PM Soni L. <fakedme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2019-12-21 4:58 p.m., Gregory Salvan wrote: > > Years ago there was an interesting movement called anti-if campaign, now > it's more promotional, but the concept of "anti if" may help you find ways > to remove the cases where your suggest "and if" and "or if" can apply. > This article is particularly well written: > https://code.joejag.com/2016/anti-if-the-missing-patterns.html > > If you have cases where you think "and if" and "or if" can be helpful, you > probably underuse oop. > > > I would very much rather not be told that OOP is the be-all end-all of > programming. Python is not an OOP language. If you want to breathe and > preach OOP, you should quite frankly just use Java. > > > Le sam. 21 déc. 2019 à 20:32, Soni L. <fakedme...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> >> >> On 2019-12-21 4:15 p.m., Andrew Barnert wrote: >> > > On Dec 21, 2019, at 08:41, Soni L. <fakedme...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > I'd like to see the ability to do: >> > > >> > > if x: >> > > 1 >> > > and if y: >> > > 2 >> > > or if z: >> > > 3 >> > > >> > > The truth table for these would be: >> > > >> > > x | y | z | result >> > > 0 | _ | 0 | (none) >> > > 0 | _ | 1 | 3 >> > > 1 | 0 | _ | 1,3 >> > > 1 | 1 | _ | 1,2,3 >> > > >> > > and each statement is evaluated once, when encountered. (as such, y >> and z may not be evaluated at all, if their evaluation is not necessary to >> determine the outcome.) >> > >> > So this is equivalent to: >> > >> > if x: >> > if y: >> > 1, 2, 3 >> > else: >> > 1, 3 >> > elif z: >> > 3 >> > >> > I can see how the former saves me having to repeat the 3 three times. >> But the cost is being less obvious about when exactly I get a 3 so I’m >> forced to work it through step by step—including the confusion about the >> 1,0,0 case, which, as you mentioned, is only clear if you imagine putting >> an else at the end (although maybe you’d get used to that once you’d read >> through enough of these?). It’s even less obvious if you do throw in an >> elif, or just add an and if to the end (so now the condition to get there >> is not “x and y or z and w” but, I think, “((x and y) or z) and w”? >> > >> > Does that advantage outweigh the disadvantage? Certainly not for this >> example. But that’s probably because even the rewritten example is >> meaningless and useless. Maybe it would be different with a realistic use >> case, but I can’t imagine what that would be. Surely you must have some >> case where you really wanted this, that motivated you to propose it? >> > >> > >> > >> >> "1" and "2" and "3" are pieces of code, ofc. >> >> it's actually more like: >> >> if flag := x: >> 1 >> if y: >> 2 >> if flag or z: # note that "or" is short-circuiting. >> 3 >> >> but more efficiently implemented in bytecode without that "flag" local >> showing up. >> >> it's literally meant for easing the translation of switch statements >> from other languages and nothing else. (well, at least the "or if" part. >> the "and if" part isn't very useful. maybe to reduce deep indentation I >> guess?) >> _______________________________________________ >> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ >> Message archived at >> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/NNVZQ5HITRW2357ED5SEWL5UDL4X5LWR/ >> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >> > > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to > python-ideas-leave@python.orghttps://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/WNJUFZRW2ZJGE6CEVDTIESDBP47VD4N6/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/2B7Q2M52XF3TEH33ONLKFY2WZB4WG3XL/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/RFGRPP6GGFS5WRIG3QYVYO5WT3ZJ6LNW/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
