On 2014-08-19 14:05, Saager Mhatre wrote:
[..]
I realized this myself a long time ago, around the time I joined TW and
started putting Ruby in production. However, all the dynlang love in
the
air at the time seemed to be blinding people to it. Since then I've
sensed
this sentiment among those that have grown wiser with age and
experience.
But you're the first one I've heard call it out without mincing words.
[..]
I don't want to be misconstrued as "taking a side" though. I still like
dynamic languages for glue kind of work and when I want the dynamism.
Scripting rules, places where quick turn around is more important than
"correctness" e.g. elisp for Emacs, perl for quick and dirty text
processing and things like that.
It's just that apart from a more general "use the right tool for the
job" and "everything has it's place" attitude, I'm leaning towards
actually putting these things in a hierarchy of some kind and saying
that X is, on the whole, better than Y rather than just hand waving
about how they're all "equal".
Two points. It's very likely that I'm wrong about this in which case,
it's one of those "stepping stones" that people slip on more often than
not and secondly, with all the new work on languages and implementations
going on recently, it's a great (and prudent) time to embrace the
virtues of being a polyglot programmer.
_______________________________________________
BangPypers mailing list
BangPypers@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
