Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2

[Chris Angelico]

On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 9:58 AM, alex23 <wuwei23 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10 May, 07:51, Mark Janssen <dreamingforw... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Languages can reach for an optimal design (within a
>> constant margin of leeway).   Language "expressivity" can be measured.
>
> I'm sure that's great. I, however, have a major project going live in
> a few weeks and would rather just get something done.

Hmm, not really a fair argument there. A well-designed language lets
you "just get something done" far more efficiently than a
poorly-designed one. Being confident that similar objects behave
correspondingly when invoked the same way lets you write your code
without fiddling with minutiae, for instance. ("Hmm, I'll just switch
that from being a tuple to being a list, so I can modify this one
element." - code that indexes or iterates won't be affected.)

Now, whether or not it's worth _debating_ the expressiveness of a
language... well, that's another point entirely. But for your major
project, I think you'll do better working in Python than in machine
code.

ChrisA