Toxic Elephant : Tag python, everything about python

Aaargh!

blog@matijs.net (matijs) — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:35:00 +0000

I’m upset. I’m so upset that I was originally going to call this entry “Fuck you, Python”. Now, I realize that’s not a very nice thing to say, and actually, Python can’t really help it anyway. Except by not existing¹.

Why, why, why must every other new language created these days have significant indenting? You see a new language, like Cobra, you read the overview of features, and you go, cool, great runtime performance, static and dynamic typing, and contracts, too. So you browse on to the hello world example, and boom! the absence of end-of-block tokens hits you in the face like an iron fist.

Now, in Python’s case you can tell from the reasoning² and the implementation that somebody actually thought this through, but Cobra has the following rationale for using this method of block structuring:

Cobra uses indentation to denote code structure since adept programmers do this anyway in languages that don’t even require it (C#, Java, C++, etc.)

Wow. I’m going to make a language that uses the comma-space token to separate function arguments, since adept programmers put a space after the comma in languages that don’t even require it.

Look, if you use indenting for block structure because you like Python, just say so already.

Oh wait, there’s more:

In Cobra, one INDENT is accomplished by one TAB or four SPACES.

Huh? Because adept programmers indent four characters anyway even in languages that don’t require it? Because adept programmers use one tab per four spaces anyway even in editors that don’t require it?

Sheesh.

I feel much calmer now.

¹ See how reasonable I am. I’m not actually calling for the non-existance of Python.

² I don’t agree with that reasoning either, but at least it’s, you know, reasonable.

Skipping Python for Ruby

blog@matijs.net (matijs) — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 18:59:00 +0000

Without an e writes:

Well, ruby just isn’t that much better than python. If I’m going to relearn everything, why would I bother with ruby? Why not just jump straight to lisp?

I can really appreciate this argument, since it resonates with my reasons for not learning Python: I knew Perl, and was doing most of my programming in it, making nicely structured, readable, object-oriented programs. To me, Python didn’t seem like such a big step forward: It’s like a Perl with enforced readability.

And then came Ruby.

My introduction to Ruby was not through Rails, but through reading the online version of the Pickaxe Book. After reading the first chapter, I was sold. Here was a language that truly embraced object-orientation, and gave access to all kinds of interesting abstractions that I had only vaguely heard of (such as coroutines). There also was a pleasant lack of boilerplate.

So to me, Ruby is that much better than Perl, whereas Python is not. I wouldn’t know if I agree that Ruby is not that much better than Python, but at least I can understand the argument. Ruby is certainly no Lisp, although it comes close.

So what’s next? Lisp’s features certainly look appealing, giving basically the pinnacle of power of abstraction, in exchange for slightly unappealing syntax. I believe the syntax can be overcome, so my next language to learn may well be a Lisp. Which Lisp is still an open question. On the other hand, there are interesting languages like Erlang, ML and the like.

[Incidentally, Without an e is the creator of Scarlet Lambda, which is roughly a web framework written in, or at least used with, a functional style of programming in Python, with a Lisp-like syntax. Wow.]