4 ms·

Thankyou! So many programmers seem to forget they have an enormous base of syntax and logic which is not at all like natural language. They see python and say,

Thankyou! So many programmers seem to forget they have an enormous base of syntax and logic which is not at all like natural language. They see python and say, oh wow this is so easy to read, just like English! But its only an easier way to express a syntax that really is nothing like what a nonprogrammer would consider English.

shazow 15y ago
It varies. When I was helping @limedaring learn Python, I'd read source with her and explain what it does. Quite often I'd feel somewhat embarrassed when explaining what a line does by verbatim reading what it says. "for user in users: ..." "if user.is_admin: ..." It was especially nice that the topic of "what code block does this condition apply to?" did not even occur to either of us. The indentation-based blocks made it completely organic. (Try explaining Bash to someone and when to use do/done, if/else/fi, case/esac.) But sure, things get weird with decorators and generators and other advanced features.
- loxs 15y ago
  IMHO, decorators, although very useful are a big departure away from python's "simplicity" in syntax. I remember having lots of headaches several years ago wile trying to fit it in my brain. Even after I realized it is something as simple as JavaScript's myfun(fun(){}), my brain somehow continued denying to absorb it.
  - dcosson 15y ago
    Agreed that they can be tricky initially and hard to debug, but I think they're totally worth it for eliminating repetitive code. And IMO as long as there isn't a bug in the decorator itself, code with decorators can be just as readable (if not more so) to someone else (e.g. decorating your functions with @authenticated instead of if self.user.is_authenticated: # blah, blah blah)
    - craigyk 15y ago
      if Python had better function syntax and anonynous functions, decorators wouldn't even be a 'thing'
      - j-kidd 15y ago
        Can you elaborate on that? The more I use Python, the more I find it to be a well thought out language with a very consistent feel, allowing me to write code without thinking. Well, except when it comes to decorators. How would you propose to improve the syntax?
      - irahul 15y ago
        > if Python had better function syntax and anonynous functions, decorators wouldn't even be a 'thing' Better function syntax? What's wrong with python's function syntax and how does it relate to decorators? Python does have anonymous functions, though they are limited: You can have only 1 expression, you can't have statements, and you can't have local variables. The reasoning is lambdas should be used for small operations; for everything else, named functions should be used. The reasoning behind lambdas is arguable, but it still doesn't explain how it affects decorators. Consider: def memoize(fn): from functools import wraps @wraps(fn) def memoized_fn(*args): if not memoized_fn.cache.has_key(args): memoized_fn.cache[args] = fn(*args) return memoized_fn.cache[args] memoized_fn.cache = {} return memoized_fn @memoize def fib(n): if n < 2: return n return fib(n-1) + fib(n-2) print fib(100) What would a better function syntax and anonymous functions do so that memoize decorator won't be a thing?
        maxerickson 15y ago
        Less restricted anonymous functions would allow stuff like this: fib=memoize(function...) So the @ shortcut for: def fib(): ... fib=memoize(fib) wouldn't be necessary to 'clean up' the decoration of the function.
        15y ago

shazow 15y ago

It varies. When I was helping @limedaring learn Python, I'd read source with her and explain what it does. Quite often I'd feel somewhat embarrassed when explaining what a line does by verbatim reading what it says. "for user in users: ..." "if user.is_admin: ..." It was especially nice that the topic of "what code block does this condition apply to?" did not even occur to either of us. The indentation-based blocks made it completely organic. (Try explaining Bash to someone and when to use do/done, if/else/fi, case/esac.) But sure, things get weird with decorators and generators and other advanced features.

loxs 15y ago
IMHO, decorators, although very useful are a big departure away from python's "simplicity" in syntax. I remember having lots of headaches several years ago wile trying to fit it in my brain. Even after I realized it is something as simple as JavaScript's myfun(fun(){}), my brain somehow continued denying to absorb it.
- dcosson 15y ago
  Agreed that they can be tricky initially and hard to debug, but I think they're totally worth it for eliminating repetitive code. And IMO as long as there isn't a bug in the decorator itself, code with decorators can be just as readable (if not more so) to someone else (e.g. decorating your functions with @authenticated instead of if self.user.is_authenticated: # blah, blah blah)
  - craigyk 15y ago
    if Python had better function syntax and anonynous functions, decorators wouldn't even be a 'thing'
    - j-kidd 15y ago
      Can you elaborate on that? The more I use Python, the more I find it to be a well thought out language with a very consistent feel, allowing me to write code without thinking. Well, except when it comes to decorators. How would you propose to improve the syntax?
    - irahul 15y ago
      > if Python had better function syntax and anonynous functions, decorators wouldn't even be a 'thing' Better function syntax? What's wrong with python's function syntax and how does it relate to decorators? Python does have anonymous functions, though they are limited: You can have only 1 expression, you can't have statements, and you can't have local variables. The reasoning is lambdas should be used for small operations; for everything else, named functions should be used. The reasoning behind lambdas is arguable, but it still doesn't explain how it affects decorators. Consider: def memoize(fn): from functools import wraps @wraps(fn) def memoized_fn(*args): if not memoized_fn.cache.has_key(args): memoized_fn.cache[args] = fn(*args) return memoized_fn.cache[args] memoized_fn.cache = {} return memoized_fn @memoize def fib(n): if n < 2: return n return fib(n-1) + fib(n-2) print fib(100) What would a better function syntax and anonymous functions do so that memoize decorator won't be a thing?
      - maxerickson 15y ago
        Less restricted anonymous functions would allow stuff like this: fib=memoize(function...) So the @ shortcut for: def fib(): ... fib=memoize(fib) wouldn't be necessary to 'clean up' the decoration of the function.
        15y ago