[Python-ideas] Inconsistencies (was: Shuffled)

[Sven R. Kunze]

On 08.09.2016 04:00, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 11:43:59PM +0200, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
>
>> >BUT experienced devs also need to recognize and respect the fact that
>> >younger/unexperienced developers are just better in detecting
>> >inconsistencies and bloody work-arounds.
> That is not a fact. It is the opposite of a fact

You might have heard of: "There are no such things as facts, just 
opinions. Everything, we see is a perspective not the truth." See below, 
why this applies here as well.

>   -- inexperienced
> developers are WORSE at spotting inconsistencies, because they don't
> recognise deep consistencies.

Your example (default arguments) might make sense when going one or two 
level deeper. However:


Is going deep really necessary at all?


People program for different reasons, to have fun, to create value for 
others, to educate, or for reasons we both cannot even think of. Why 
should they leave their level? Because of you or me? Because they need 
to know what Turing-completeness means? What calling conventions are? I 
don't think so. They wanna solve problems and get things done whether or 
not they know every single bit of the language they use. If they decide 
to go deeper, that's wonderful, but if they don't, don't force them.

So, an inconsistency at level 1 might be a **result of a consistency at 
level 0** BUT it nevertheless is and stays an inconsistency at level 1 
no matter how sophisticated the consistency at level 0 is.


And please note, some even want to go on level up, so inconsistencies at 
level 1 just plain suck then. People then simply don't care about how 
the current flows at cpu level or about your carefully handcrafted bits 
and pieces on level 0 which you are so proud of and which are so 
consistent there.

Cheers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20160910/0cbd5d14/attachment.html>