Re: python strings

Mark Lutz (lutz@KaPRE.COM)
Tue, 26 Apr 94 16:20:09 MDT

A cast of thousands (well, not really :-) wrote:

> [seemingly endless discussion about changing Python string literals...]

Is it just me, or does it seem that Python's in danger of losing
some of its simplicity? I always thought that was one of its best

I understand the various arguments for the string changes, and they
seem sound (and I've even been guilty of getting into feature-peddling
myself :-), but what I've seen lately makes me worry that we may be
pushing Python towards some horribly complex syntax/semantics, that
has eveybody's-favorite-feature, but is almost unusable [can you say
"Perl"? :-(].

When we start talking about stuff like, for example:

> With literal catenation but not triple-quotes, it's
> "" + " " + " " + "" == ' '
> With both, it's ambiguous, yes?

we're running the risk of alienating alot of potential users. Further,
the utility of a prototyping tool really is directly proportional to
its ease-of-use, and hence its simplicity. I like Python, and I think
alot of other people will too; unless we make it hard to understand...

Probably too early for concern, but just a reality check from a big
fan of both Python and simplicity.

Mark Lutz