Multiple dispatch again

[David Mertz]

|On Sat, 04 Jan 2003 02:36:07 -0500, David Mertz wrote:
|> But the idea of raising an error on inconsistencies also strikes me as a
|> wart for the same reason that I think the incommensurability of complex
|> numbers with other objects is a wart (and Python's biggest wart).  It is
|> a nod to purity over practicality. In this case, I'd rather have something
|> that is unintuitive at the margins than I would an exception.

Paul Foley <see at below.invalid> wrote previously:
|When you write
|  "foo" + 7
|and get an exception, is that a "wart"?  You'd rather get "something
|unintuitive" than an exception, right? :-)

The thing is, the only way that I can even begin to comprehend what Paul
thinks he is arguing is by putting on my "purity-beats-all-else"
blinders/glasses.  Python isn't (supposed to be) a bondage-and-discipline
language... which only from a total purity perspective would mean it
never raised exceptions.

That said, I'll finish reading "A Monotonic Superclass Linearization for
Dylan" today... maybe I'll be more convinced then.  But I definitely see
the introduction of brand new exceptions for the same actions that used
to work as a *bad thing*, that needs an awfully strong justification.  I
don't find "because the new way is theoretically pure" to be such a
reason.

Yours, David...

--
mertz@  | The specter of free information is haunting the `Net!  All the
gnosis  | powers of IP- and crypto-tyranny have entered into an unholy
.cx     | alliance...ideas have nothing to lose but their chains.  Unite
        | against "intellectual property" and anti-privacy regimes!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------