On 3/11/06, Joe Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well the original was almost certainly a tongue-in-cheek reference to LISP.
LISP was a disaster to use, so I doubt your language would have been any
worse.
The way one identifies a lisp programmer is to find the person whose paren
keys have
worn
Joe Smith wrote:
LISP was a disaster to use, so I doubt your language would have been any
worse.
At least Lisp would let you say
(* 4 a c)
and not force you to write
(* (* 4 a) c)
My language would not have been so forgiving,
unless you were willing to define a bunch of
different *
Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeremy Hylton wrote:
Perhaps the solution
is to require parens around all expressions, a simple consistent rule.
I actually designed a language with that feature once.
It was an exercise in minimality, with hardly
Morel Xavier wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Contrast with the bleeding obvious:
level = 0
if absolute_import in self.futures:
level = -1
regards
Steve
The issue that spawned the necessity of a ternary operator in the first
place was that this syntax is not usable at
Steve Holden wrote:
Contrast with the bleeding obvious:
level = 0
if absolute_import in self.futures:
level = -1
regards
Steve
The issue that spawned the necessity of a ternary operator in the first
place was that this syntax is not usable at all in quite a few
Joe Smith wrote:
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim Jewett wrote:
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling that
the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures
On 3/7/06, Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
Paul Moore wrote:
On 3/7/06, Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single)
On 3/7/06, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The parentheses around genexps were (AFAICT)
different - without them, the grammar was ambiguous,
so some way of disambiguating was needed.
The out-of-order evaluation is a very large change,
because now we have a situation where normal
parsing
Jim Jewett wrote:
On 3/7/06, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The parentheses around genexps were (AFAICT)
different - without them, the grammar was ambiguous,
so some way of disambiguating was needed.
The out-of-order evaluation is a very large change,
because now we have a
On Mar 7, 2006, at 7:29 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
...
In fact, I think the below examples are reasonable uses
that do a better job of expressing intent than the if
statement would. I just don't like the mental backtrack
they require, and would like some sort of advance
warning.
Paul Moore wrote:
+0 for mentioning parens around conditional expressions in PEP 8. But
it's aready covered by the general code should be readable in my
view.
Indeed. Writing readable code is ultimately the
responsibility of the person doing the writing.
It's enough that you *can* put
Greg Ewing wrote:
Jeremy Hylton wrote:
Perhaps the solution
is to require parens around all expressions, a simple
consistent rule.
I actually designed a language with that feature once.
It was an exercise in minimality, with hardly anything
built-in -- all the arithmetic operators,
Now that we have started to see conditional expressions ... I would like to see them parenthesized. The parens aren't as important as they are with generator expressions, but ... they matter.From a recent checkin --
level = 0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1Mentally, I can't help
On 3/6/06, Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From a recent checkin --
level = 0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1Mentally, I can't help parsing that as level = 0 plus comments that turn out to be code that triggers backracking.When the expressions (particularly the true case) are
On 3/6/06, Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/06, Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
level = 0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1
Mentally, I can't help parsing that as level = 0 plus
comments that turn out to be code that triggers
backtracking.
I think that
Jim Jewett wrote:
Now that we have started to see conditional expressions ... I would
like to see them parenthesized. The parens aren't as important as they
are with generator expressions, but ... they matter.
From a recent checkin --
level = 0 if absolute_import in self.futures
Morel Xavier wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Contrast with the bleeding obvious:
level = 0
if absolute_import in self.futures:
level = -1
regards
Steve
The issue that spawned the necessity of a ternary operator in the first
place was that this syntax is not
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1)
+1 (just because I can't give it
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim Jewett wrote:
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling that
the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1)
Contrast
[Jim Jewett]
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling that
the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1)
[Steve Holden]
Contrast with the bleeding obvious:
level = 0
if
Alex Martelli wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures else -1)
+1 (just because I
23 matches
Mail list logo
