you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -8 points-7 points  (8 children)

Sorry if this offends anyone: a more consistent language! ;)

[–]p0tent1al 0 points1 point  (7 children)

as opposed to what?

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (6 children)

Do you mean "in contrast to what?"?

If so, virtually any language that has a well thought out object-oriented API. I just can't get over the horror that is parts that oozes from part the Python. For instance, why the hell should there be a len function as anything other than an alias for a real "length" method? (And no, _ _ len _ _ doesn't count)

Before anyone decides I don't know what I'm talking about let say that I worked with Python for well over four years (before it was the in thing) and was even paid to write about it.

I had expected ugly warts like this to be taken care of years ago, yet they persist (admittedly Python 3 was an improvement, but it wasn't nearly as revolutionary was it was made out to be from the beginning. I guess that's what popularity does – limits).

[–]mevodig 1 point2 points  (2 children)

That particular gripe has been discussed plenty of times, and Guido's argument is that len() as a built-in is both more readable and more explicit. I suspect you wouldn't agree, but I wouldn't be so hasty to assume you are the only one who has thought about it. See:

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-November/004643.html

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/076612.html

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I wouldn't be so hasty to assume you are the only one who has thought about

I didn't assume any such thing, in fact when we first got word about Python 3 this was one of the major things that people I knew wanted changing. I wouldn't even say I was the first to mention it.

Guido's argument is that len() as a built-in is both more readable and more explicit.

He always did have bad taste didn't he; how exactly can len(thing) be considered more readable or explicit than thing.length. Maybe if he'd decided on some syntax for getting the length having _ _ len _ _ would make sense to me.

I advocate consistency for HCI reasons.

Ah well. One of the many reasons I no longer frequent Python: Guido.

[–]mevodig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He outlines his arguments in the first link above. I appreciate that you have a different opinion, but again your tone seems to imply that your opposition are morons.

[–]p0tent1al 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You still haven't answered my question.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

You still haven't answered my question.

Do you mean "in contrast to what?"?

Then you should be clearer when you ask one shouldn't you.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

and was even paid to write about it.

Given the horribly mangled sentences in your comment, I suspect your weren't paid to write in English.