Python and Flaming Thunder

[Dave Parker]

> ... there's something that feels very unnatural about writing English as code.

I think it is ironic that you think Flaming Thunder is unnatural
because it is more English-like, when being English-like was one of
Python's goals: "Python was designed to be a highly readable language.
It aims toward an uncluttered visual layout, using English keywords
frequently where other languages use punctuation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_(programming_language)#Syntax_and_semantics

> Just using your "Set ... to" idiom, rather than a
> regular = assignment, makes things much more wordy, without improving
> readability.

I think it does improve readability, especially for people who are not
very fluent mathematically.

Also, in Python how do you assign a symbolic equation to a variable?
Like this?

QuadraticEquation = a*x^2 + b*x + c = 0

Set statements avoid the confusion of multiple equal signs when
manipulating symbolic equations:

Set QuadraticEquation to a*x^2 + b*x + c = 0.

On May 13, 9:50 am, "Dan Upton" <up... at virginia.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Dave Parker
>
> <davepar... at flamingthunder.com> wrote:
> > >  The "Flaming Thunder" looks promising, but without being free
> >  > software, it's unlikely it will create a large developer community,
> >  > specially considering both free general purpose and scientific
> >  > programming languages.
>
> >  Perhaps.  Flaming Thunder is only $19.95 per year for an individual
> >  (and even less per individual for site licenses), which is less than
> >  the cost of just one book on Python.
>
> Bah, subscription for a programming language?  As far as I'm
> concerned, that's reason enough not to bother with it.  Paying a
> one-time fee, or even once per upgrade, for a full-featured IDE and
> lots of support tools is painful but at least justifiable, whereas
> paying a yearly license just to even be able to try something out when
> there are so many free, sufficient options... There was an article
> on/in Wired not so long ago about the economics of free, and how
> there's a huge difference mentally between free and not-free, even if
> the practical difference is "free" and "$0.01."  (Also, I assume
> hdante meant, at least partly, free as in speech, not free as in
> beer.)
>
> As an aside, I clearly haven't written anything in FT, but looking at
> your examples I don't know that I would want to--there's something
> that feels very unnatural about writing English as code.  It also
> somehow seems a bit verbose, while one of the strengths of something
> like Python (since that's what you're comparing it to) is rapid
> implementation.  Just using your "Set ... to" idiom, rather than a
> regular = assignment, makes things much more wordy, without improving
> readability.  Some of your other structures are awkward, for instance
> "Something is a function doing" Again, more text with arguably no gain
> in readability.
>
> Just my two cents, anyway.  I now return you to the resident madman,
> who I see has sent 4 or 5 messages while I was typing this one...