Re: [RFC] Draft Proposal for New Python Syntax

Michael Lee Keller (mlk4v@watt.seas.Virginia.EDU)
Thu, 26 May 1994 13:50:54 GMT writes:
> Paul Sijben ( wrote:
> > I really disagree with the proposal to change the syntax of Python. I find
> > the current syntax helpful for producing readable programs in a positive
> > way. When you change that you put the door wide open for the creation of
> > very messy and unredable programs.
> As long as the "new style" can be parsed correctly, it's also possible to
> write a pretty-printer for it, which could reformat all the (potentially)
> ugly code you might get from someone with an, in your opinion, bad taste.
> (Btw, one can also write extremely ugly code with the current rules ;-)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> * wonder everyday * nothing in particular * all is special *
> Marc Wachowitz <>

But why? Yea, C code could also be parsed this way, but I
don't see a good program that prints it out nicely. From what
the draft shows, the proposal is to reinvent C and call it

Why I like Python is its simplicity - I have suggested to many
that it be used as a teaching language around here instead of
C++. Why have the problem of ;'s and {}'s - when writing a
program of any size, it is VERY hard to find when one of these
is missing. It is much easier to see that a line of code was
not indented to the right place - the code just makes more
sense. If you do some serious programming, the majority of
time is not spent writing the code or using macros or code
generators - it is spent finding BUGS in programs. Why not
write in a language that is naturally readable.

Guido - keep the syntax. I like it, others like it, it is
understandable, and is so easy to teach (and, as far as
evidence goes, for me it took the least amount of time to learn
of any language I have picked up). I used to write solely in
C, and I was able to move to Python without problem, so I see
no need to let C syntax creep back in.

My $0.02,

Mike Keller  (