Jarrod:
> But there will still be a comma or a semicolon there for cases where you want the index.

Yes, like:
foreach(i, el in obj)
So the problem I was talking about is solved, because you can only have commas there, and no semicolons. And it's not easy to mistake a comma for the "in".


> there are a *lot* of groans and moans about it. *Especially* from the lisp/scheme fans. They seem to hate it with a passion.

And some of them (but not the AI expert Norvig, he has re-invented something like that) don't like the Python doctests, that I love (and I miss when I program in D):
http://docs.python.org/lib/module-doctest.html


> Some have even written some 'interesting' poems about it. True story.

Maybe they are envious that today Python has much more success than their languages, despite being an "inferior" language ;-)

Bye,
bearophile

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:58:00 -0500, bearophile wrote:

> Yes, like:
> foreach(i, el in obj)
> So the problem I was talking about is solved, because you can only have
> commas there, and no semicolons. And it's not easy to mistake a comma
> for the "in".

Well, my main gripe was with the 'in' not the commas.


> Maybe they are envious that today Python has much more success than their languages, despite being an "inferior" language ;-)

Oh boy, language wars. Not getting involved with that.

I wasn't trying to be a jerk about forced indentation or anything, I mean I still like python and it works well with its indentation rules. But it doesn't mean I have to like it. I like my own style and as you can see from some of the other replies regarding this, many others have their own styles regarding nested conditionals too.

> I mean I still like python and it works well with its indentation rules. But it doesn't mean I have to like it.

Uh, 'it' in the last sentence being the forced indentation, not python. Perhaps I should try this 'proofreading' thing I've heard all about.