Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<20240829085246.00003ab5@gmail.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 08:52:46 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 31 Message-ID: <20240829085246.00003ab5@gmail.com> References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <v9m4gd$14scu$1@dont-email.me> <20240815182717.189@kylheku.com> <v9npls$1fjus$1@dont-email.me> <v9t204$2dofg$1@dont-email.me> <va28pi$3dldm$1@dont-email.me> <va2ro9$3gd7v$1@dont-email.me> <va2vt0$3h3gj$1@dont-email.me> <va44rh$3p1l6$1@dont-email.me> <va45eq$3pkt9$1@dont-email.me> <va4aut$3q4g0$1@dont-email.me> <va4fbr$3qvij$1@dont-email.me> <va5108$3tmmd$1@dont-email.me> <va51ok$3tqr9$1@dont-email.me> <va5ec2$3vluh$1@dont-email.me> <va6q4g$c1a7$1@dont-email.me> <va6rpa$c6bg$1@dont-email.me> <va6se9$cb8e$1@dont-email.me> <20240826083330.00004760@gmail.com> <vaises$2k7o6$2@dont-email.me> <20240826155113.000005ba@gmail.com> <wwvo75eicla.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vak9k9$2ujrs$1@dont-email.me> <valgpu$34s18$1@dont-email.me> <vannkg$3ig72$1@dont-email.me> <vanrd8$3j0vv$1@dont-email.me> <vantnp$3j94i$1@dont-email.me> <vapp91$3v4l8$3@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 17:52:50 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fe5ee229dc287aa20fb403ba14b23ff8"; logging-data="3375"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18zV/24p1KuSI4yXdfbWEPmRSkYGKO1P8c=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:lR7tCYspv/jZeCwcrxEEbsLjrkQ= X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.38; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Bytes: 3575 On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 14:24:01 +0200 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > Don't you ever just accept that a language is the way it is, and it > is perfectly useable that way? Or think that perhaps other people in > the world know better than you do about how they want their language > to work? Has it never occurred to you that the people behind a given > language - such as Python - considered various alternatives and > decided that making it the way they did was the best choice overall > for the language they wanted? They probably did - but did they do that *because* of the point in question, in spite of it, or without any meaningful inclination toward or against it? There are plenty of other aspects about Python that may tip the balance in spite of its annoyances. F'rinstance, the *very* comprehensive set of libraries make bashing out quick utilities to do A Complex Thing often very simple. (That was the reason I first used it - needed a quick-'n-easy way to programmatically deliver data in a POST request from a Windows box in production, and it beat the hell out of trying to wrap my head around Win32 network programming.) But if the language "wins" on that score, that doesn't mean its annoyances or flaws are any less real or worthy of complaint. Like, obviously it's way too late in the game for Python to change this now. But we can still say it's stupid for them to have done it that way in the first place. Is that a matter of opinion? Sure, but that's never stopped anybody from expressing themselves re: any other language. (How many people are still bitching about C being "insecure," 50+ years down the line?)