On 2010-11-06, Philip Semanchuk <phi...@semanchuk.com> wrote: > The former refers to something that programmers would use to learn >the language once they've gone through the tutorial a few times. >The latter is great for writing a Python parser but isn't the >friendliest guide to language constructs.
That sounds, then, like it's not very well written, even for language lawyers. > It seems that plowing through a document written for language >lawyers is the only formal way to learn about those language features, >and that could be improved upon IMO. It sounds to me like it could be improved on, but I don't think the problem is "written for language lawyers", but "not very well done". If you do a good job of writing something useful to language lawyers, any programmer should be able to look things up in it. -s -- Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nos...@seebs.net http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated! I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list