Gavin Sinclair graced us by uttering:
> My two reasons for disliking Python's aesthetics:
> 
> - indentation-as-syntax
> 
>   At first I thought it was a nice idea, but I actually find it
>   difficult to read.  A class definition, especially, should
>   have an explicit end.  Most importantly, though, it's not
>   advanced-editor friendly.

I've never found it difficult to read, and actually was really
excited about it.  I found a few instances where it was a bit
awkward, but overall I thought it was a good idea.  Editors do
seem to have trouble with it at times, but I didn't notice a huge
problem.

In the end, though, I don't miss it as much as I thought I would.

But this is also the greatest way in which Python has contributed
to the modern coding community.  For example, I've never, ever,
ever seen a Python function definition like this.

    def foo(arg1, arg2)
    do_stuff()
    do_some_more_stuff()
    while some_condition:
    do_some_conditional_stuff()
    for var in some_list:
    do_more_stuff_with(arg1)

....I wish I could say the same for Perl.  ;)

> - explicit "self" parameter to methods
> 
>   I absolutely detest this.  I *had* to stop reading my Python
>   book when I discovered this.  I picked it up again recently
>   to find out if the nightmare was actually true.  It was.

I agree totally, completely, and unrelentingly.  I didn't like
'this' in C++, I didn't like 'my $self = shift;' in Perl, and I
really didn't like Python's 'self' shattering my dreams that
Python might actually be an elegant OO language.

> My (main) reason for liking Ruby's aesthetics:
> 
> - it's terse

Yes.  All in all, I think that Python is a refreshingly "clean"
language, syntactically.

Ruby, however, I find both fun and useful.

Tim Hammerquist
-- 
If you had two people with a motive, and one of them
was alive, who would you arrest?
    -- Inspector Boot, "Theater of Blood"