On 03/16/2012 10:48 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:10:12 +0100, Kiuhnm wrote: > >> Maybe we should define *exactly* what readability is (in less then 500 >> lines, if possible). > > If you can't be bothered to read my post before replying, save yourself > some more time and don't bother to reply at all. > > I quote from the part of the my post you deleted: > > When people talk about readability, they normally mean to > ask how much mental effort is needed to interpret the > meaning of the text, not how much time does it take to > pass your eyes over the characters. In other words they > are actually talking about comprehensibility. > > > Unless I've made a mistake counting, that's less than 500 lines. > > >> According to your view, ASM code is more readable than Python code. It's >> just that there's more to read in ASM. > > What a ridiculous misrepresentation of my position. Readability is not > proportional to length.
For someone who claims he's merely examining the language and seeking to learn about it, Kiuhnm is jumping awfully quickly into the realm of trolling. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
