Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 26 Nov 2005 00:36:51 -0800
Mike Meyer <mwm@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Those two statements say the same thing. Part of the Python philosphy,
> from "import this", is that there should only be one obvious way to do
> it. By enabling that part of Python's philosphy, you're automatically
> limiting python to not allow other - specifically non-pythonic - ways
> to do the same thing.
Sometimes there are zero obvious ways to do it, or an obvious way that
doesn't work, so if you want to do it at all, you have to find a
contorted way. At that point it's normal to ask why there isn't an
obvious way that works. All too often, the answer is "that would be
un-Pythonic".
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: Mike Meyer
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- References:
- about sort and dictionary
- From: Shi Mu
- Re: about sort and dictionary
- From: Fredrik Lundh
- Re: about sort and dictionary
- From: rurpy
- Re: about sort and dictionary
- From: Steven D'Aprano
- Re: about sort and dictionary
- From: Mike Meyer
- Re: about sort and dictionary
- From: bonono@xxxxxxxxx
- Python as Guido Intended
- From: rhettinger
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: rurpy
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: Mike Meyer
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: rurpy
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: Mike Meyer
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: Antoon Pardon
- Re: Python as Guido Intended
- From: Mike Meyer
- about sort and dictionary
- Prev by Date: Re: wxPython Licence vs GPL
- Next by Date: Re: Making immutable instances
- Previous by thread: Re: Python as Guido Intended
- Next by thread: Re: Python as Guido Intended
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|