next you'll be advocating special keyboards with extra keys for these symbols.
what do you want to turn us into, IBM mainframe APL programmers? --guy Dov Grobgeld 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Ahik Man <[email protected] > <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 _______________________________________________ Python-il mailing list [email protected] http://hamakor.org.il/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-il
