Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Shlomi Fish <shlomif@s...> wrote: > Hi Ihe, > Hello > > At times like that, one can really appreciate what Linus Torvalds reportedly > said that his main job as the kernel chief maintainer is "To say 'No'." or else > we get many different tools that all have everything including the kitchen > sink, and many of them were not designed for that. > Amen. > > Anyway, saying that it is used by people who are against > using list comprehensions does not necessarily mean it is wrong in all other > cases, and furthermore may be considered a "guilt by association". > Indeed. Lying with dogs get you fleas. > > Someone once told me he didn't like lambdas/anonymous functions/closures in > Perl 5 (he was originally a Perl 4 programmer) and that they are hard to > understand and that I shouldn't use them. Shortly after Joel on Software wrote > this post - http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/08/01.html - most > competent programmers understood that closures are often a good idea and most > modern languages should support them natively (and the fact that in Python > lambdas can only have a single expressions leaves a lot to be desired). > So the story that I have told once before on this list when I asked my Scheme professor (an alumnus of yours at Technion) what a closure was and he said "You know what it is" (because he'd seen me code them) "You just don't know thats what they are called". > > Furthermore, projects often find it useful to standardise on a style guide, > which constrains the syntax and features that one is allowed to use. Some of my > patches required amending due to a wrong placement of braces, or because they > added trailing whitespace, and I rejected patches due to similar reasons. I'm > not saying that completely forbidding the use of Python's list comprehensions > is a good idea (and using the alleged lack of utility of high school math as an > excuse is certainly a poor thing to do), but some coding style rules are > probably a good idea.[Indent] > This is true. However it has an "uncanny" way of reducing to Fortran 77 with objects, which is a generic way of describing the sort of code list comprehension abolitionist consider comprehensible.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
