Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:35:58 +0000 Subject: Re: Joy of this, Joy of that Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc References: <6iKdnTQOKNh6AqD6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> <20241120081039.00006d2a@gmail.com> From: "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> Organization: wokiesux Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:35:57 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Lines: 62 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 99.101.150.97 X-Trace: sv3-o7gpo27OiMbG83Ffbey9rRoW43GeaJsgW35xxiEKnrCEdLNswTYNb1BIW3JlSuPEDKyD8cbL7+1Ujn7!NsU+t4fBNpbqIe85CzlYAYBpxIxr90HgOUGsynZl61koWBfteNGD4FQ1LwwT4J+aegUetuELXGVx!oRdcgcRjvD7shAJ3x98h X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 4711 On 11/24/24 12:01 AM, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 23:48:59 +0000, Pancho wrote: > >> I'm actually quite unconvinced by Python. > > For many things it provides a convenient level of abstraction if > performance isn't a major concern. It's not so much the language itself as > that the language has become very popular and the range of modules has > greatly expanded. > > For example, the Esri Python API makes common GIS manipulations less > painful than using C++. Similarly if you're into machine learning while > TensorFlow and PyTorch have C++ bindings almost all tutorials will use > Python. In data science Python is starting to overtake R and is actually > faster for some operations. For REST APIs you have flask, django, and > several other frameworks. > > For embedded work as Arm microprocessors have become the norm and SRAM has > greatly increased a Python interpreter, either MicroPython or > CircuitPython can be loaded on the device. Again you can work in C++ and > get greater speed and control but it comes at a cost. Controlling a servo > with PWM is easy in Python. Doing it in C++ means you need to determine > the slice and channel for the GPIO pin, decide what to load into the > counter to get the desired frequency from the 125 MHz clock,determine if > you need to use the divider for lower frequencies, and make other > decisions. > > Using Python means you get uniformity across many disciplines and it's > good enough for most things. It could have been Perl if it hadn't gotten > stuck in the tar pits, or Ruby, or Go but from whatever twist of fate > occurred it was Python. For almost anything, it's good enough - or more than good enough. The large number of libs has left little beyond its (relatively easy) reach. It's also READABLE, nothing too mysterious about the syntax or defining/using vars and such. Do kinda pref "{ }" or "begin end" over the dangling depth thing ... get six or eight levels into something and it's a total bitch to spot what's inside what without using comments. However it's NOT as fast as the true compiled langs. Yea, yea, there's Python compilers - turn it into 'C' - but with sometimes difficult barriers and the final exe tends to be pretty fat - VERY VERY fat if you get past version issues by encapsulating all the needed libs inside the exe. In any case, it's become the "new BASIC" for good reasons and I don't see that being changed anytime soon. It's in *everything* now from microcontrollers on up. I never learned it until M$ started sneaking it into their OS junk. "What's a .py ???". The good side of that is that it was right near the v2 -> v3 transition and I decided to learn the 'new and improved'. Anyway, I do full apps and utils in Python and almost always use it to proto stuff before re-writing in 'C' or Pascal.