On 09/19/2010 03:36 AM, Seebs wrote:
On 2010-09-19, Steven D'Aprano<st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote:
I'm not entirely sure I agree with you here... you can't ignore syntax in
order to understand the meaning of code.
No, but the syntax should be invisible. When I read English, I don't have
to think about nouns and verbs and such unless something is very badly
written. The syntax is handled automatically at a lower level without
conscious intervention, as it should be. Calling my conscious attention
to it is disruptive.
The interesting thing is that syntax highlight for me *is* handled at a
lower level. What you're describing is exactly the same as when I try a
highlight scheme with colours that are too strong, or have a background.
I would rather use no highlighting at all than a theme with garish
colours.
When I read code, I filter out colours when I don't need them and filter
out non-coloured text when I'm looking for a particular structure. So,
with x = y if a else z, I might see . = . if . else . and then
immediately see x . y . a . z, already with knowledge of what is the
structure surrounding vars.
Punctuation is very different from highlighting, IMHO. That said, I
find punctuation very effective at being small and discrete, clearly not
words, and easy to pick out. Color cues are not nearly as good at
being inobtrusive but automatically parsed.
Seems like the difference of how you process colours vs. how I do, for
me they work precisely in the same way as punctuation might, but adding
an additional layer which may be used but never gets in the way.
-ak
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
