[Python-Dev] PEP202
Jeremy Hylton
jeremy@beopen.com
Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:57:38 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>> "ESR" == Eric S Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com> writes:
ESR> Greg Ewing <greg@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz>:
[>> ESR wrote:]
>> > What they want to be is an applicative sublanguage in
>> > functional style
>>
>> Um, that might be what *you* want them to be, but it's the
>> complete opposite of what *I* want them to be, which is a way of
>> getting away from all those convoluted combinator constructs!
ESR> So your theory is that non-intuitive procedural syntax so
ESR> complex that it *needs* usability testing is better.
ESR> Riiiight...
Wow! There's so much jargon being slung here I don't know what's
going on. (For the second time in the last few weeks, I feel like a
bit player in a movie where all the major roles are played by Peter
Sellers. <wink>)
Seriously, I don't understand how to apply terms like "applicative
sublanguage in functional style" or "procedural syntax" to a concept
like list comprehensions. The basic idea is to express the elements
of list using a set-like notation similar to the one used by
mathematicians. I don't know whether to call that applicative,
functional, or procedural; perhaps none of them applu. Maybe it's
just late, but I suspect that these high-level terms don't inform the
debate much.
I think we can all agree on two things:
1. Greg and Eric have different goals, which is fine.
2. Usability testing is always a good thing. To paraphrase Fred
Brooks, even the best language designers aren't so omniscient as to
get it right the first time.
Jeremy