Re: I did not inhale

Liste des GroupesRevenir à l c 
Sujet : Re: I did not inhale
De : kalevi (at) *nospam* kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen)
Groupes : comp.unix.shell comp.unix.programmer comp.lang.misc
Date : 15. Aug 2024, 21:48:36
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v9lm2k$12qhv$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : tin/2.6.3-20231224 ("Banff") (Linux/6.10.3-200.fc40.x86_64 (x86_64))
In comp.unix.programmer Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
Sometimes, there seem to be some choices how to do something in
Python.

Of course. The slogan is just, well, a slogan, not to
be taken 100% literally. For example, there are almost
always some choices to be made whether to use
object-oriented features or not.

Some years ago I wrote a simple but useful Python
script for searching eBay items. It is so
simple that no classes are really necessary, one
could use just dictionaries/hashes instead. But for
some sanity, I think I used a class or two to
make things a bit better organized and self-documenting.

The last I checked, the O'Reilly Python book is just
absolutely *MASSIVE*. The language has a huge number
of features now and it is pretty obvious that choosing
which ones to use can be a matter of preference. So
there is no "One True Way" to choose.

I guess this is not much different from C++ which proclaims
to be multi-paradigm, but nobody ever uses the immense
full feature set. I've been told that all serious
C++ programming teams stick to a subset of features
that are allowed to be used.

br,
KK

Date Sujet#  Auteur
21 Sep 24 o 

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal