Python as Guido Intended

[bonono at gmail.com]

Mike Meyer wrote:
> "bonono at gmail.com" <bonono at gmail.com> writes:
> >> You're the one that wants to use the hammer to do whatever it is, not
> >> me. I don't believe in silver bullets. Python is good at what it
> >> does. If I need a different tool, I use a different tool, rather than
> >> try and mangle a good tool into something it's not. Such attempts are
> >> pretty much doomed. They nearly inevitably produce a tool that's not
> >> as good at what the original did as the original, and not as good at
> >> whatever new task it's being mangled to do as a tool that was
> >> designed for that in the first place.
> > And again.
>
> This isn't a Python thing, it's a believe about tools in general -
> that you should choose the right tool for the job. It isn't applied
> very often to hardware tools because they aren't as mallable as
> software tools, and have in general been around and improving for a
> long time. But it applies to programming languages, data formats, and
> similar more mallable things. Changes that make them better at what
> they do are welcome; changes that make the into what they aren't are
> viewed with great suspicion.
>
> Maybe Python attracts people who share that belief.  After all, TRTFTJ
> is implies TSBOOWTDI, and vice versa.
I was not talking about the believe, I was talking about the way you
presented it. You are setting up an "imaginary" me, which is not me.
And that is the kind of arguments I saw, I believe this many times are
done unconciously.