Wow, this is pretty cool. For what it's worth, Mathematica does a bit of this. (But it's not really like Python.)
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Dov Grobgeld <[email protected]> wrote: > The use of assigment through left arrow (←) would solve this. Which reminds > me of the fact that I would have loved having a language like python that > uses more of unicode for its syntax. > > Then "python" might look like: > > ∀ n ∈ names: > if n ≠ "foo": > α ← n > ß = re∘search〈"foo", α〉 > > No more overloading of parens, decimal dots, minus signs, etc. > > Of course it would take some time to learn how to type all these chars on > the keyboard, but by some clever editors macro tricks, you would quickly get > over this. > > Here's another pythonic construct that imo would look nicer. > > f← λ x: x↑2 > a←f〈2〉 > > But I'm dreaming. Nobody will ever do anything as crazy as this... ☺ > > Cheers, > Dov > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 15:28, Amit Aronovitch <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Ahik Man <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> What do you think about this code: >>>> >>>> for n in range(2, 10):... for x in range(2, n):... if n % x == >>>> 0:... print n, 'equals', x, '*', n/x... break... >>>> else:... # loop fell through without finding a factor... >>>> print n, 'is a prime number' >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't like this 'for - else' trick. IMHO it's confusing and not >>>> readable. >>>> >>>> >> I really like this (very natural) programmatial construct. >> I use it all the time, and feel handicapped in languages such as C, where >> you have to define an extra boolean flag and manually set/check it to >> achieve the same result. >> >> As for the choice of keywords, it is not that bad (maybe just got used >> to it after years of usage), but I agree the semantics might not be obvious >> to unaware readers. Certainly not up to Python's praised readability >> standards. >> Personally, I don't like the choice of '=' as the syntactical marker for >> name-binding. It makes people think it is an operator, and expect c-like >> semantics. Source of endless bugs for newbies and repeated misunderstandings >> in mailing lists. >> >> Well, the advantage of having a BDFL is that someone is in charge of >> making such choices and we do not have to argue about this any more. Only >> other option is to try to keep everyone happy by supporting several versions >> of the syntax (works fine in Perl, but takes its toll in readability and/or >> learning-curve). >> >> AA >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Python-il mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-il >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Python-il mailing list > [email protected] > http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-il > > -- Sincerely, Ram Rachum
_______________________________________________ Python-il mailing list [email protected] http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-il
