What's better about Ruby than Python?

[Michele Simionato]

Hans Nowak <hans at zephyrfalcon.org> wrote in message news:<mailman.1061515908.27282.python-list at python.org>...

> One of Python's strengths is that you can create powerful abstractions with 
> functions and classes.  But no matter what you do with these, they will always 
> be functions and classes that adhere to some common language rules.  There is 
> no way to go "over the top" and change the language proper. 

This is a mere illusion. There are metaclasses and descriptors now.

> Right now I can 
> read everybody's Python code (unless deliberately obfuscated); this would 
> change if there were macros that were so powerful that they would change 
> language constructs, or allow new ones.  Maybe they would make your problesm 
> easier to solve, but Python itself would lose in the long run.
> 
> My $0.02,

We already have things worse than macros. Still I am not suggesting we
should add them, because of KISS. But the idea of Python being well
behaved is a mere illusion, however well kept. See my other posts
on "macros revisited" for more on this.

Michele Simionato, Ph. D.
MicheleSimionato at libero.it
http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~micheles
--- Currently looking for a job ---