On Sunday, July 1, 2012 5:48:40 PM UTC+2, Evan Driscoll wrote: > On 7/1/2012 4:54, Alister wrote: > > On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 23:45:25 -0500, Evan Driscoll wrote: > >> If I had seen that in a program, I'd have assumed it was a bug. > > > > You would? > > I have only been using python for 6 - 12 months but in my past I > > programmed microcontrollers in assembly. > > > > as soon as i saw it i understood it & thought great, like a light bulb > > going on. > > It's not a matter of "I wouldn't have understood what the author was > trying to do" (with a small caveat), it's a matter of "I'd have assumed > that the author didn't understand the language semantics." > > I'm pretty sure it goes contrary to *every other programming language > I've ever used* (and a couple that I haven't). > > I understand why Python does it, and it certainly is nice in that it > matches typical mathematical notation, but the surprise quotient is > *very* high in the PL world IMO. > > Evan
Avoiding suprises would mean we cannot improve languages, just reshuffle features? Cheers, Lars -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
