From: Sean Russell Date: 2001-10-25T13:53:12+09:00 Subject: [ruby-talk:23259] Re: Bruce Eckel's opinion of Ruby Emiliano wrote: >> Then it will be her variables that will be overwritten, not mine. > > Which is great if you work in isolation and interface cleanly. It's > not so great if people work on one package where the separation is not > so clear. A very good point. >> Really, using global variables is such a poor programming habit that I >> believe that if you have someone on your team using them, you have more >> problems than just global variables. > > So why not make them impossible? Why not hire decent programmers ;-) No, really. If someone doesn't know how to use the tool properly, don't hire them for the job. If you're already employing them, they either need training, or a pink slip. > OK, so that means coding style can differ from year to year. I don't > see that as a plus. Where I work with C we work according to the safer Hmmm. Well, another point of disagreement. I believe that some degree of variability is good. In any case, Python isn't going to protect you from change in coding standards. > years and people coming and leaving, it was well worth the grumbling > people would do about the anal/ugly/unreadable/ we > took in the beginning. Aaah. This sounds like the infamous "Yeah it sucks, but we have to maintain backward compatibility" argument. :-) >> So I'd argue that Python would not have changed this in the least. In > > So it wouldn't have hindered you either once you got past the initial > shock. Aside from the fact that nobody but Guido has any choice in the matter. Do you use Linux? > Python doesn't enforce a naming scheme, and I wouldn't stand for a > compiler that would. Here's the point of divergence. I feel towards Python's formatting restrictions as you do about (hypothetical) naming restrictions. Every argument you've made so far in support of Python's enforced style could be made by someone in support of compiler-enforced naming conventions. On the other hand, you *could* make the argument that any language that you didn't write yourself imposes some stylistic restrictions. Specifically, however, for whatever reason, you accept Python's style restrictions but wouldn't accept further restrictions, while I reject style restrictions imposed by the language author. Interestingly, Ruby's naming restrictions (the whole case thing) caused me some heartburn when I first got started with it. Every language suffers from this to some extent; although I chafe at the restriction, it does coincide with my normal naming scheme, so I turned a blind eye. > I'll agree to disagree. Not all matters ned be democratic. Well, we certainly agree there. I wasn't advocating democracy, however, but local control. I maintain that this is a difference between a remote dictator whom you'll never talk to, vs. a local dictator whom you interact with daily. I'd rather have the local dictator. > I can't believe I'm taking a stand for Python. Put it down to loving a > good discussion anytime. Wow, that's almost admirable. I was just being an onry cuss. --- SER -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! ==-----