walterbyrd wrote: > On Dec 21, 12:28 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers > <bdesth.quelquech...@free.quelquepart.fr> wrote: >> Strange enough, >> no one seems to complain about PHP or Ruby's performances... > > A few years back, there was a certain amount of chest thumping, when > python/django easily beat ror in a benchmark test. Now that ruby is > faster, I guess speed is no big issue. > A fairly limited amount of chest-thumping, as I remember it.
> By the same reasoning, python advocates used to sneer at php because > php constantly broke backward compatibility. Now that python does it, > breaking backward compatibility is no big deal. I guess unicode > support was not that important, until python caught up to perl. > Python advocates shouldn't sneer at other languages. There's no need. If you like Python, use it because of its merits, not because it's better than something else. Having said which, I must say that Python's "breaking backward incompatibility" is of a somewhat different nature than (say) Visual Basic's. It was known about for *several years* in advance, even before Guido went to work for Google and finally had time to get the work underway. Also it's defined to be a singular event, not a continuous set of creeping changes. Python 3's updated syntax now constrains the developers in the same way that Python 2's used to. I wouldn't say that could remotely be described as "constantly" breaking backward compatibility. > I guess, the way it works is: you first assume that python is > superior, then you figure out why. > That's the way some people operate, but by no means all. Is it the language or the people that are pissing you off. You sound a little discontented for a c.l.py reader. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
