Remove your “self” from my premises!
Bruce Eckel made some comments about the upcoming Python 3K (or is it Python 2.9)? While I respect the work that Bruce does and think he is very intelligent, I think I have to agree more with Guido van Rossum’s retort. Yes, the issues that Bruce brings up would be nice to solve. However, as Guido says these are mostly library issues not core issues, and more aptly
It’s open source. What are you waiting for?!
As far as the complaint about self, I realize that this is a religious war and has no clear answer. I do completely agree with Brandon Corfman’s comment about the confusing message TypeError: printString() takes exactly 1 argument (2 given) where one of the arguments is always self. Putting self as the first argument of a method has bothered me about Python since I started using it; however, I do not agree that Python user’s shouldn’t have to use self. when referring to an instance variable. I think Bruce is just plain wrong when he says that “parroting ‘explicit is better than implicit’ is a misuse of that maxim.”This is exactly the kind of thing that maxim is good for. There is no question in anyone’s mind where that variable is coming from when it has self. prefixed to it.
I also prefer things like self. to Ruby’s @, because self at least has a chance of being interpreted correctly without having to look up its meaning. Using an arbitrary character such as @ has no chance of correct interpretation without reading the manual. This is the main reason that I like Python: the syntax is consistent. Okay, it’s not as consistent as Lisp, but it’s pretty consistent. This is also the reason that I hate Python’s decorator syntax, but that’s a discussion for another day.
I think it’s pretty clear that Python 3K isn’t going to solve everyone’s problems and make everyone happy, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.
