Flat-schmat!

[Kenny Tilton]

A.M. Kuchling wrote:

> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:27:47 GMT, 
> 	Kenny Tilton <ktilton at nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> 
>>Python (I gather from what I read here) /deliberately/ interferes in my 
>>attempts to conform my code to the problem at hand, because the 
>>designers have decreed "flat is better". Python rips a tool from my 
>>hands without asking if, in some cases (I would say most) it might be 
>>the right tool (where an algorithm has a tree-like structure).
> 
> 
> Oh, for Pete's sake... Python is perfectly capable of manipulating tree
> structures, and claiming it "rips a tool from my hand" is simply silly.

Well then I am glad I did not say it! :)

I am talking about coding up an algorithm, not manipulating a tree of 
data. An example is:

      (my-function ;; takes three parameters, which follow
           (this-function x yz) ;; p1
           (case x (:left 1)(:right -1)) ;;p2
           (if (some-other-function 'z)
               42
               'norwegian-blue)) ;; p3

where my-function gets passed the first two computations plus either 42 
or 'norwegian-blue, ie, the value returned by the IF form.

Looks simple to me. But IIUC (I may not!) in Python IF is a statement, 
so that would not work too well. I need an artificial extra statement to 
satisfy an artifical rule.

kenny