Perl is worse!

[Ben Wolfson]

On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:11:18 GMT, grey at despair.rpglink.com (Steve Lamb)
wrote:

>On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:24:08 -0400, Tim Peters <tim_one at email.msn.com> wrote:
>>Steve, in case it isn't clear yet, Python programmers *want* to be blown out
>>of the water when doing something as senseless as
>
>>    1 + "foo"
>
>    It isn't senseless.  That is the whole point.  It is only senseless
>because of typing.  Clearly you cannot add a word to a number, granted.  But
>what of 1 + "1"?  That isn't senseless, those are two numbers.  I can see they
>are two numbers, it is only because of typing that it fails.  
>
>    So I ask you this /VERY/ simple question.  Why can't Python do both?  Hm?
>What is wrong with taking 1 + "1", converting the "1" to a 1 and adding it
>together?  If it is a string that cannot be converted to an integer, throw an
>exception, otherwise, do it.  Then that preserves the 1 + "foo" exception and
>also does the sane thing of getting rid of types when it makes sense to do so.

Well, what if you wanted 
	1 + "1"
to result in "11", not 2?

>    Hell, why do an exception at all?  Why not do what is already done with
>integers, reals and floats?  
>
>1 + 1 = math
>
>1 + "1" = math
>
>1 + "foo" = string ("1foo")

That could lead to some interesting results if you expect numerical input.

>"foo" + "foo" = string ("foofoo")
>
>    You already accept:
>
>1 + 1 = integer
>
>1 + 1.2 = float
>
>1 + 1j = complex
>
>    So please don't tell me you don't want "automagic" type changing when it
>is already there and, I'd wager, you use it extensively.

Those are all numeric types.  I don't see why you don't also start arguing
for the validity of 

 list(1 + ['4', someclassinstance] + "lalala")

-- 
Barnabas T. Rumjuggler

93. When someone says "I want a programming language in which I need only
say what I wish done," give him a lollipop.
 -- Alan Perlis <http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html>