Hacker News Reader

Comment by voyou | Hacker News Reader

"Its extreme concision should make visually parsing code faster than parsing equivalent code in other languages."

You know, I don't think this is true at all. Concision can make things harder to read, because you have to understand everything you read from scratch. A language where some common patterns come with a bit of boilerplate allow you to orient yourself via that boilerplate. The visual representation of a common pattern provided by the sugary syntax of some languages is, in one sense a waste of space and typing, but it can make code easier to read than a more concise language would be.

View on HN

I'm not quite sure I understand your point, but you're disagreeing with the above quote whereas I agree wholeheartedly with the quote.

Compare a language which forces you to write this

    ll = []
    for x in xx:
      if bar(x):
        ll.append(x)

This is Python, but imagine you're doing this in Java or C++ instead. Every time you read a for loop, you have to re-derive what the author intended. Are they just iterating? Are they composing a new list? Remember, these loops are often more than just two lines and they are common.

Contrast the above with

    ll = [x for x in xx if bar(x)]

Or even (in Haskell)

    filter bar xx

When your language gives you primitives to talk at a higher level, you can write more crisply and concisely. The simple, trivial code you've written 1e9 times is replaced by a very clear, simple definition of what you're doing. The important code, the interesting code may now speak for itself.

To be honest that Python list comprehension is really hard for me to internalize.

I find Ruby way much more natural.

xx.select { |x| bar(x) }

Even Clojure is better

(filter (fn[x](bar x)) xx)

(filter #(bar %) xx)

You don't need that anonymous function in Clojure, (filter bar xx) is enough just like Haskell.

You are right. Thanks.

Sure, I do, too. Ruby is one of the languages that made me experience how expressive the higher-order function pattern really is.

That said, in Python, you have to take what you can get, though. And generally I expect more people are familiar with Python than Haskell. Probably I should've used Ruby. Oh well.

BTW, friendly tip: if you want code formatting, try using four spaces of indent. You might only need two, actually. Let's see. Two spaces:

  filter foo xx

Four spaces:

    filter foo xx

Reply on news.ycombinator.com