On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 5:16:29 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 12:42:50 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > > I sympathize. Can you get Python without getting a language like C > > first? Can a baby be born without an umbilical cord? Can you skip Newton > > and go straight to quantum mechanics and relativity? I have noticed some > > experienced Java programmers are a bit lost in the woods because they > > don't have an idea of what is going on under the hood. > > And how would you classify C# in this scheme (pun unintended)? > > Note that C# is in .Net what C is in Unix -- the primary building block > language. > > But C# also has claims to being higher level than C like java/python etc.
To be fair (and to make the opposite point of what I was making above) I should describe a recent encounter with some C# folks. They were doing something in what needed to be a fast loop. Looking over the code I found some dictionary lookups. I suggested digesting the dict-key into an int and using arrays instead of dicts. They did it and got a 10x speedup. So C# (just as your above cited typical Java programmers) certainly can produce programmers who are clueless of what's 'under the hood' -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
