In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sunnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> [Aahz] >>>> >>>>"The joy of coding Python should be in seeing short, concise, readable >>>>classes that express a lot of action in a small amount of clear code -- >>>>not in reams of trivial code that bores the reader to death." --GvR > >It's just that I'm having a hard time matching that quote to what I >though python was about. I thought boring code was considered a virtue >in python. ("Explicit is better than implicit", "sparse is better than >dense".) > >Because what is "boring"? The opposite of dense, tense, intense. Utterly >predictable; it's like the combination of all my prejudices. Even before >I knew, I thought "Bet Python separates statements from expressions".
Note very, VERY, *VERY* carefully that the quote says nothing about "boring code". The quote explicitly refers to "reams of trivial code" as boring -- and that's quite true. Consider this distinction: if foo == 'red': print 'foo is red' elif foo == 'blue': print 'foo is blue' versus print "foo is", foo I'm sure you can think of many other examples -- real examples -- if you put your mind to work; Guido's point is about the essential necessity of refactoring and rewriting code for conciseness and clarity. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "The joy of coding Python should be in seeing short, concise, readable classes that express a lot of action in a small amount of clear code -- not in reams of trivial code that bores the reader to death." --GvR -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list