[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 12:45:11 -0700
From: Paul Prescod <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Guy Steele - Sun Microsystems Labs <Guy.Steele@sun.com>,
Subject: Re: Accumulator
Guy Steele - Sun Microsystems Labs wrote:
> I am puzzled. Could you please elaborate on what you
> mean by "decreasing the regularity"?
Sure. But I won't get drawn into a debate on it because I've been
through the debate often enough on Python mailing lists.
Simply when you pick up someone else's code, how much does it look like
the Python you are used to? This is a subtle issue because obviously we
can't force everyone to use the same function names. But we can add a
large library so that people feel less need to reinvent things. And we
can make the language syntactically rich enough that they feel less
inclined to reinvent primitives (e.g. exceptions, generators, maybe
someday coroutines). ...
Ah, I see; thank you. I wasn't sure whether you were
usng "regularity" to mean "familiarity/standardization"
(which is what you seem to mean after all) or "internal
design consistency" or "orthogonality of design/
separation of concerns".