On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 03:18:55PM -0500, Ryan Flannery wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Nick Guenther <kou...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Python is about thinking about what you're doing. It's one of those >> > languages that forces you to work on a higher level (not that there >> > aren't lots of places where python is used as a scripting >> > language--that code tends to come out badly, but that's because it's >> > written just to get the job done). >> > >> > Ideal code is abstracted code, what possible use does repeating >> > yourself in the tree have? I know drivers have to declare a common set >> > of globals and make some macro calls and various entry-points are >> > found by sticking to a naming scheme, but that's trivia, hardly enough >> > to justify "valid uses for copied code". Anytime I find myself wanting >> > to copy some code it's always meant I've stumbled over an abstraction >> > I haven't made yet, so what in the world is src/ doing that -requires- >> > copied code? >> >> I must disagree here... there's nothing about *any* programming >> language [1] that forces one to work on a higher level. That's up to >> the programmer. I've seen even the simplest tasks, or ones that >> scream for a nice, simple abstraction, done horribly (if at all) in >> any language, including python. My experience grading countless >> programs from freshman-senior students, which are increasingly written >> in python, show it's not the programming language... it's the >> programmer. > > There is no limit to shit code produced by amateurs and "professionals". > > Python suffers from the same lib catastrophe that java has. > >> >> Good design + good coding practices + tons-o-work forces one to think >> more and come up with a better design, not the language. >> >> -ryan >> >> [1] except of course for Haskell, the ONE TRUE GOD of proper programming :P > > Really? then why do you use scrotwm?
Because 1) that was a joke/jab at the Haskell folks, who often make similar claims about Haskell, and 2) William Boshuck already put it best.
