Do pythons like sugar?

[Afanasiy]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 00:21:43 +1100, Andrew Bennetts
<andrew-pythonlist at puzzling.org> wrote:

>On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 12:54:24PM +0000, Afanasiy wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 22:29:33 +1100, Andrew Bennetts
>> <andrew-pythonlist at puzzling.org> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> You don't know what I am doing. My design is perfect.
>> >
>> >What is good design for one language isn't necessarily good design for
>> >another.  Python offers different features to, say, C++, and is best used in
>> >different ways.  I would recommend that you try to understand the pythonic
>> >world-view better, rather than insisting on imposing your preconceptions on
>> >us... my experience agrees with Andrew Dalke's; explicit self is much better
>> >than the alternatives.
>> 
>> If the "pythonic world-view" is that code which would look better with
>> implicit self is "poor implementation", then no, I do not agree with it.
>
>The pythonic world-view on this particular issue is that "Explicit is better
>than implicit", yes.

Except that is entirely not my point. Thinking so causes friction.
And this friction is only bad for me, because you create the two
sided argument from your side so that it looks like I am somehow
anti-Python or anti-implicit. It's a disgusting way of communicating.

>> Please note I am not complaining out about the lack of this possibility.
>> I only have a problem with the condescending tones. I guess it's normal.
>
>In my experience, people who find this sort of thing about Python annoying
>aren't using Python optimally.  My recommendation is to trust us, show us
>your whole class, and invite constructive criticism on its design.  This may
>sound condescending, but this newsgroup is filled with experienced Python
>programmers, and I would be very surprised if you considered yourself better
>at writing Python than them.

I would rather not have people to tell me how to design basic classes.
Thanks for the offer. I will surely ask if I need the assistance there.