4 ms·
I don't write Go code but I admire them for sticking to their guns to not include it. Having had to decipher nested ternaries in the past, it's not something I
by nickjj 5y ago
I don't write Go code but I admire them for sticking to their guns to not include it. Having had to decipher nested ternaries in the past, it's not something I want to have to think about again.
Python has some interesting shortcuts too, like being able to do `if 1 <= number <= 10:` to do chained comparisons but I much prefer the longer hand syntax. I have a solid amount of Python experience but no formal math background beyond HS Algebra. I often don't see this shorthand method to compare a range but when I do I always have to stop and decipher it.
I know this thread isn't about Python but I think it falls in line with this conversation. A language that sticks to slightly more verbose syntax for the sake of crystal clear clarity is very appealing.
- lamontcg 5y agojust because someone can abuse a language feature doesn't mean you should bar every responsible programmer from using it.
- nickjj 5y agoYeah, but there are other languages that support the idea of there being many different ways to do something and also give you a lot of rope to either hang yourself or create "clever" solutions (this isn't a bad thing btw, besides Python I also really like Ruby too). I think we should respect language creators to keep a clear vision on their language, this way the audience who uses it can either strongly love it or hate it. If you try to do everything and cater to everyone then you'll end up with a worse result IMO. It's the same way with music. You wouldn't expect a deathcore band to release a country album because a small portion of folks were interested in that, it would alienate their true fans and would likely leave the band internally not liking that decision. If you want to listen to a different style of music then you can pick a different band or genre.