Python

那些我不理解的…

math.ceil() and math.floor() return floats, not integers (probably to avoid an integer overflow in the underlying C function - but why not cast to a Python long?) len() is a function not a method reload() is very limited, does not reload a module 9 times out of 10, only reloads an imported label if it is a module - i.e. cannot do from bar import foo; reload(foo) if foo is not itself a module Mutable default arguments have a single reference (why not a new instance each function call?!) All these underscored variables - if they are so private, how come we see inbuilt ones so much in code? Get a namespace! Strings are not mutable - maybe there is a good reason for this but I have come across many situations where I would like to tweak one particular character ...

那些基于实现有意义但令人讨厌的……

array.sort()不返回数组(我认为它发生在原地) 列表/生成器推导式不定义新的作用域(只是for循环的语法糖，对吗?)

以及几个在Python 3中修复的

默认为整数除法 Global只能引用顶级名称空间

TCL

这是我最喜欢的语言，几乎可以做任何事情。多年来，它已经(慢慢地，非常缓慢地)演变为解决大多数让我烦恼的事情。而且这门语言非常灵活，很容易实现语法来覆盖那些仍然困扰我的东西。但是语言中有一些东西是不能轻易改变的，只是打破了它的禅意:

Arrays (of the associative kind, what Perl calls hash) don't have proper value semantics. This makes them awkward to pass to and return from functions. Also, this means that they can't be nested. For this reason dicts (dictionaries) were invented but too late, the nice array access syntax: $array($foo) is now forever taken by stupid arrays for backwards compatibility. We're now stuck with: dict get $dict $foo which is much more verbose and to me feels less readable. No real closures. Though it can be emulated somewhat by globals or namespaces but that defeats the reason for closures in the first place. Although, I can't really see for now how closures can be implemented in a pure value semantics system. Teacup is hard to use and is not at all intuitive compared to all other repository tool out there. This is more ActiveState's fault than tcl-core and doesn't really break tcl's Zen when coding but it is still very annoying.

C++

The inconsistencies in the libraries related to char* and std::string. All C++ libs should take std::strings. Characters are not bytes with respect to iostream. I do a lot of byte-oriented work. Having a "byte" type and a "character" type would significantly make it simpler. That, too, would permit scaling to Unicode somewhat easier. Bit operations should be easy on a value. I should be able to access and set the n'th bit of a value without playing AND/OR dancing. The lack of a standardized interface for GUIs. This is where Microsoft has really been able to position themselves well with C#. A standard interface binding that OS makers provide would go really far for my work.

PHP

没有构造函数重载 不一致的函数命名(str_replace，但strtolower) define()不像c++那样逐字替换全局变量。 在与XHTML组合时，像if-语句这样的语句必须以不缩进开始，即使为了保持XHTML缩进一致，XHTML是缩进的。

Ex:

你必须输入:

<?php
if($x == NULL)
{
?>
                     <p><?= $x . ' is null' ?></p>
<?php
}
?>

错误捕获非常糟糕

(不知道为什么又把5号改成了1号，随便了)

JavaScript:

The Object prototype can be modified. Every single object in your program gets new properties, and something probably breaks. All objects are hash maps, but it's difficult to safely use them as such. In particular, if one of your keys happens to be __proto__, you're in trouble. No object closure at function reference time. In fact, no object closure at all -- instead, this is set whenever a function is called with object notation or the new operator. Results in much confusion, particularly when creating event callbacks, because this isn't set to what the programmer expects. Corollary: calling a function without object notation or the new operator results in this being set equal to the global object, resulting in much breakage. Addition operator overloaded to also perform string concatenation, despite the two operations being fundamentally different. Results in pain when a value you expect to be a number is in fact a string. == and != operators perform type coercion. Comparisons between different types involve a list of rules that no mortal can remember in full. This is mitigated by the existence of === and !== operators. Both null and undefined exist, with subtly different, yet redundant meanings. Why? Weird syntax for setting up prototype chains. parseInt(s) expects a C-style number, so treats values with leading zeroes as octal, etc. You can at least parseInt(s, 10) but the default behaviour is confusing. No block scope. Can declare the same variable more than once. Can use a variable without declaring it, in which case it's global and probably breaks your program. with { }. Really difficult to document with JavaDoc like tools.

Self

没有真正的代码浏览器 数百个小窗户飞舞 周围。 只是一个研究项目， 不够稳定，没有活动 社区。 没有相当快的版本 适用于Linux或Windows。只有Mac OS X。 不支持标准键盘 命令。 哦!关于编写本地插件的文档也太过时了!