On Monday, 21 March 2016 04:13:45 UTC, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:59 PM, <rhardin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > instead, to be efficient, it is best to combine tools to solve problems > > that contain complexities where there is nothing available off the shelve > > that does the job. c# is free, free VS studio, i can run ironpython there, > > i can do python there, and talk to linux boxes with python, i can run c# on > > linux boxes using mono(did that back in 2004 and thereafter for a while). > > i can run python on my beaglebone black inside of snappy ubuntu, ect. > > > > so i ask those employers why not use what is available to solve problems > > instead of limiting yourself to just one??? > > Because you won't be there forever, and they'll have to find someone > else to maintain your hellspawn hodge-podge of languages, tools, and > libraries. (And yes, it will be described that way by the next person, > no matter how careful you are.) It's in their interests to restrict > its complexity at least a bit. I'm not sure what advantage you gain by > incorporating C# into the mix, but the *dis*advantage is that, forever > afterward, Visual Studio and Mono will be necessary to use and develop > this project. Every new thing needed is another thing that can go > wrong, another thing people need to learn, etc, etc. > > So instead of treating programming like a plumber at a hardware store, > treat it like an artist with a canvas. You wouldn't normally see a > portrait done partly in watercolor and partly in oils - or if it is, > it's for a VERY deliberate effect. You'd more often see one style used > for one project, and maybe another one used for another. > > ChrisA
Spot on. It's actually worse than Chris says. I've had trouble with old code that I WROTE MYSELF. Please don't tell me that I didn't try hard enough the first time......the only time to find that out is the second time!! -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
