Does Python really follow its philosophy of "Readability counts"?

[Aaron Brady]

On Jan 23, 7:01 pm, Mark Wooding <m... at distorted.org.uk> wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <st... at REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes:
> > I did? Where did I make that assumption?
>
> I inferred it from the juxtaposition, apparently in error.  Sorry.
>
> > What I said was that the model "The code is the whole team's ownership"
> > doesn't work well for large projects. *One* reason it doesn't work for
> > large projects is that you will invariably have cowboys who, given half a
> > chance, will code irresponsibly *if you let them* by encouraging the
> > attitude that, sure, that class written by the database backend team
> > belongs to everyone, never mind that you're in the UI team, go right
> > ahead and use whatever internals you like.
>
> `Cowboys' will code irresponsibly anyway; they need reeducating gently
> with a stick.

A lot of this is a question of how tight you want the handcuffs.
Stricter backgrounds and bigger projects make you want tighter ones.
You can't jump right from tight handcuffs to loose ones.  You'll tend
to like them looser over time.  A language looser than Python in
unheard of.

Google says: 'No results found for "looser than Python".'