9 ms·

> my freshest student in front of a code and see how they deal with it. That is fine if you want to optimize language for "fresh students". That is not represe

• mbreese 7y ago
  It's not about experience vs inexperience... it's about code readability and being unsurprising. m = re.match(...) if m: ... do something ... is verbose, but quite readable. Given that it's the way things have been done since forever, it's also unsurprising. if m := re.match(...): ... do something ... Without knowing what the walrus operator is, it is not entirely clear what is going on here. := is only syntactic sugar, which is not what Python has ever been about.
  • owaislone 7y ago
    If feel Go solves this in a much more readable way. if m := re.match(...); m { ... do something ... } Still not as readable as splitting it over multiple lines but quite a lot better than Python's syntax IMO especially once you learn how the if statement works in Go.
    • mkl 7y ago
      How is that more readable? It's identical except for ":" -> ";", and some extra symbols added. Needing to repeat "m" seems seems redundant, and particularly bad for readability as it moves the actual condition far away from the "if".
      • owaislone 7y ago
        It is better IMO because it doesn't merge two things into one. It simply translates to `if <assignment>; <condition> { <body> }` as a generic rule. Variable used in condition may or may not be the same one in assignment. Bundling assignment and condition is what people don't like about this feature.
  • clinta 7y ago
    Python already has " as " operator that I think is very readable. with open('file') as f: ... do something ... I don't know why that didn't come out on top in the debate. if re.match(...) as m: ... do something ...
• sametmax 7y ago
  It's not, it's correlation between fresh student, and what happens in the field.