Whitespace as syntax (was Re: Python Rocks!)

[fcahoon at my-deja.com]

In article <1e5p92l.xgr4fe1s2x5ptN%bparsia at email.unc.edu>,
  bparsia at email.unc.edu (Bijan Parsia) wrote:
> <fcahoon at my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1e5nkk6.1a5z8bp1lixbdvN%bparsia at email.unc.edu>,
> >   bparsia at email.unc.edu (Bijan Parsia) wrote:
> > > <fcahoon at my-deja.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > > I think, notwithstanding your experience with C (though why that
> > should
> > > be applicable to Python...), *you* have a riddle to answer: There
is a
> > > *lot* of Python code out there. The standard distribution contains
> > loads
> > > of modules from many different sources. You *yourself* indicate
that
> > > Python is becoming common place....
> >
> > The popularity of a language cannot be taken as prima facie evidence
of
> > its technical superiority.
> [snip]
>
> Well, that would be a telling riposte *if* my argument had anything to
> do with technical superiority. My point was, as Garrett pointed out,
> that the fact that there are large bodies of Python code from
> heterogenous sources which themselves have had heterogenous
contributers
> *and yet* there hasn't been (reported) wide scale difficulties is
*prima
> facie* evidence that the "whitespace munging" problem is not severe.
> Given that, the burden of proof returns to you, and analogies from
> other, *disanalogous* langauges will no longer serve.

Actually, my mention of Perl in particular is draws on the common
statements in the Python community about Perl's unmaintainability.
Granted, _you_ didn't say Perl is unmaintainable, but still this is the
basis of what I was trying to get at.

A language can have Problems (with a capital 'P') and still acheive
widespread popularity.

Of course, this isn't really fair to Perl, which is really not that bad
in my opinion -- athough the only perl code I maintain is my own, so
that makes it a lot easier for me.

> > >  [ ... ]
> > >
> > > > If python code were to become mis-formatted (and given my
> > experience, I
> > > > have to believe that sooner or later this _will_ happen)
> > >
> > > Er...not your experience of *Python* code, right? So, your
experience
> > > with Python code: 0. Everyone elses: >0 (some up to, what, 8
years? 10
> > > years?). I think it more correct that your *lack* of (relevant)
> > > experience leads you to your belief.
> >
> > It's true that my experience writing python can, for practical
purposes,
> > be called 0 here.  However, I think it is a mistake to consider the
> > posters responding to me to be representative of people with
experience
> > with python.  Already, among the majority of posts from people who
find
> > that indentation-as-syntax is not a problem, several people _with_
> > python experience who believe indentation-as-syntax _is_ a problem
have
> > spoken.
> [snip]
>
> Well, look, you've just *changed* your argument. Your original
argument
> was that *based* on your C experience, certain conclusions about
Python
> can be drawn.
>
> Now, that a few people *with* python experience chimed in is some sort
> of confirmation, but hardly what you should hope for given the
strength
> of your claim and the nature of your supporting evidence.

What I had actually hoped for was a reasoned discussion that would teach
me some valuable things.  So far, I have learned a bunch of stuff, and I
am happy.  I expressed my concerns, and gave my reasons for those
concerns.  Should I not have done so?

> And, yes, sure, there well may have been people turned off by
> "whitespace", but isn't the true measure, to be consistent with your
> argument, of the the defectives of Python's block delimitors that when
> receiving files from other people, one is *typically* left *totally
> clueless* as to the intent of the programmer? *No one* has claimed
that.

"*typically* left *totally clueless*" !?!?!?  *No one* has claimed that!
If that were true, the language simply wouldn't work at all!

I'm more concerned about the possiblilty of one bad line being left in a
infrequently-executed routine, leading to spurious errors which are
difficult to track down.

> [ ... ]
> Of course, it's theoretically possible that everybody *is* spending
all
> their time indenting and reindenting code, guessing where things
should
> go, and so on, but that the other advantages of Python *so outweigh*
> this huge effort that people put up with it anyway.

Yes, that's exactly what I was getting at.  "All the time" is, of
course, an exaggeration -- but some extra time, yes.

> I respectfully suggest that the *prima facie* case is very strongly
> against this. And given that Python is open source and that adding
> "visible" block delimiters is more or less trivial *and* *no*
> alternative block delimited version has *appeared* much less gained
> *any* following, I think we can rest confident that indentation is not
a
> problem.

After python gained a certain level of popularity, though, it would be
easier to 'put up' with the problem than hack the langauge, because of
the availability of modules and such.  So this particular argument
doesn't seem too forceful to me.

> [ ... ]

f


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.