|
I resent that... I love the C syntax.
I might be biased because I learned Macro-11 Assembly before C, and there is a one to one mapping on most C statements.
|
|
|
|
|
They come out of Math class where = means equality, go to the next class, in gentle Python = means let be equal...
|
|
|
|
|
Neither are toy languages.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think Python is losing its charm as much as people are realizing that programming is not for them.
This goes back to a post I made a few days ago, where I said that the world is throwing technology at everyone, hoping many become programmers, engineers, etc. Python was supposed to be the language for the masses. Only problem is, the masses don't like programming.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: This goes back to a post I made a few days ago, where I said that the world is throwing technology at everyone, hoping many become programmers, engineers, etc. Python was supposed to be the language for the masses. Only problem is, the masses don't like programming.
So were Basic, SQL, and COBOL at times in the past.
Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
And you may ask yourself: "Well, how did I get here?"
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not the only one to think 'Talking Heads' then...
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad I'm not alone in that
|
|
|
|
|
For those who realize that "programming is not for them," their time is spent learning how to run programs that others have created.
|
|
|
|
|
You're either a fan of strongly typed or weakly typed; or maybe both.
I used both until I found a decent strongly typed one: C#.
Without LINQ I might still be looking: it was the DML that made xBase so popular. And weak typing.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know it ever had any charm.
Significant indentation? And tabs / spaces are not equivalent? So you can have two identical looking lines of code but they compile differently? There is no charm here, just confusion and stupidity.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, ending a code block by reducing the indentation one step is a really horrible nightmare and prone to errors, especially when you press ENTER around in your text editor. I would stick to languages that use curly braces.
|
|
|
|
|
Neither have ever had any charm for me.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion Python is not a toy language (and even BASIC wasn't).
That said, Python is far better than BASIC (and Lua is even better than Pyhton ).
Scripting languages have their usage.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
CPallini wrote: Scripting languages have their usage. Let us limit them to that.
The thing is that lots of people live with the misconception that Python is suitable for general problem solving, of arbitrarily complex problems. Scripting languages are meant for scripts, for managing a process (such as the building of a software system). It startet with Job Control Languages, developed into Unix sh and all its derivatives, or .bat files developed into PowerShell. You may see scripting languages such as Python as a further developments of shell concepts.
You would never try to solve a complex problem as neither a bash nor PowerShell script. Even with further development of those concepts into Python (and its functional relatives), scripting languages are not suitable for complex problem solving.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: scripting languages are not suitable for complex problem solving. It depends...
I wrote a fairly complex application (at least from my point of view) using Lua .
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, there are project groups in our organization that make similar claims.
Still, I beg to disagree. Although it may be "possible" to use a given tool, doesn't mean it is suitable.
Disclaimer: I know nothing about Lua. From skimming trhough the Wikipedia description, I am sort of curious to hear the reasons for choosing Lua for complex problem solutions over other alternatives.
|
|
|
|
|
Lua is easily embedded in a C/C++ application, and that works also in the opposite direction, it is easily extensible using C/C++ libraries.
So, my first plan was to embed Lua in a C++ application (and write numerous C libraries for low level tasks). Eventually, I found no real need for the C++ code.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
Reminds me a fairly significant program I wrote in DCL (Digital Command Language) once -- it was an accomplishment, not to be repeated.
|
|
|
|
|
You are possibly right.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
> Python (and its functional relatives), scripting languages are not suitable for complex problem solving.
what a ridiculous remark
python is used all the time for statistics and machine learning
of course it can be used for general problem solving
and it can be used for much more that just scripts
Blender uses python
Django and Flask are python frameworks for web development
just read how netflix uses python
https://netflixtechblog.com/python-at-netflix-bba45dae649e
and they aren't the only big company using python for more than just scripting
|
|
|
|
|
CPallini wrote: Python is not a toy language
Agreed, its not, and it is very powerful and versatile language, etc.
I personally have no need for it in my personal software projects or work projects.
I hear it is a great language for data analysis, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: I hear it is a great language for data analysis, etc. I know a couple of people using it for big data and similars and they just say it is the best, I have never used it though so I can only say what I was told.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
For a starter, Python is advocaded for sci and eco. But it has no fixed point datatype.
So sci and eco learned what takes eons for prog, still delivering bugs months after using the delivered software.
0.5 + 0.5 = x is a hard to solve equation.
|
|
|
|
|
I completely agree...
I grew up on a PDP-11 running RSTS/E using Basic-Plus (The Predecessor to VAX Basic).
Most of the OS Tools were written in Basic-Plus. I could do anything in BASIC. It was pseudo-compiled (Bytecoded), and was the technology Microsoft "borrowed" to get instant compiling of BASIC for Visual BASIC.
Was it perfect? No!
Was it extensible? YES! In fact, we had MEMORY MAPPED Files that Worked like arrays, you index the file as File[X] to get a fixed block read of block X. You declared the block size when you opened the file. We used this for lightning fast Hash Lookups.
Extensible? We had to modify the OS to add "sys" calls to a jump table. But we could do it.
Now, BASIC allowed DLL calling in windows. And Python allows wrappers of compiled code.
Finally, to me the MOST POWERFUL piece of an interpreted language is the ability to EMBED it as a scripting language inside of an Application to let the end users extend it.
I wrote applications inside of Word and Excel for people. It broke my heart when I went to embed VBA inside of my application, and ran into MSFT Licensing (OMG Draconian). So we used a different scripting engine that was free and based on Pascal. It worked... But I would have loved for the product to have the Power and Libraries of Python!
|
|
|
|