3 ms·
I think, it was an example of intentional hostile design (say, see this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWZLB8CyPbM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWZLB8
by a-nikolaev 8y ago
I think, it was an example of intentional hostile design (say, see this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWZLB8CyPbM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWZLB8CyPbM for what I mean). All, seemingly for the sake of that "only-one-way-to-do-things" goal.
EDIT: (Van Rossum's own explanation of why he thinks lambda's design is okay: https://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=147358 https://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=147358 )
- eesmith 8y agoDo you have any evidence for your hypothesis about hostile design? The phrase, by the way, is "one obvious way".
- a-nikolaev 8y agoGuido van Rossum said that many times that he does not like functional primitives. It is pretty well documented in his own writing that he had no intention of making functional programming very convenient in the language.