On 16 April 2013 17:25, Ned Batchelder <n...@nedbatchelder.com> wrote:
> On 4/16/2013 12:02 PM, Rodrick Brown wrote: > > I came across this article which sums up some of the issues I have with > modern programming languages. I've never really looked at Javascript for > anything serious or Node itself but I found this article really > informational. > > "The “Batteries included” philosophy of Python was definitely the right > approach during the mid 90’s and one of the reasons that I loved Python so > much; this was a time before modern package management, and before it was > easy to find and install community-created libraries. Nowadays though I > think it’s counter-productive. Developers in the community rarely want to > bother trying to compete with the standard library, so people are less > likely to try to write libraries that improve upon it." > > > > http://caines.ca/blog/programming/the-node-js-community-is-quietly-changing-the-face-of-open-source/ > > > > I don't want to get into a package pissing match, but this math is just > silly: > > *python*: 29,720 packages / 22 years =* 1351 packages per year* > > *ruby*: 54,385 packages / 18 years = *3022 packages per year* > > *node.js* 26,966 packages / 4 years = *6742 packages per year > * > If you want to know how fast something is growing, you don't measure 22 > years and divide by 22. You look at the number of packages added in the > last year (or month). Also the assertion that people don't want to compete > with the stdlib seems like pure supposition. There are plenty of > well-loved packages that "compete" with the stdlib. Lxml, Requests, > Twisted, etc, and plenty of packages in the stdlib that started as outside > "competition". > Even looking at the last year/month might be give skewed results. If a technology is new, there's a lot more packages that need writing than if it's been around for 22 years, thus I'd expect to see the first year or second year as a good comparison point. -- ./Sven
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
