On 2018-02-17 03:22, boB Stepp wrote:
This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
Tesla. The article is found at:
https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
Apparently he chose his article title as "click bait". Apparently he
does not really hate Python (So he says.). His leader paragraph is:
"Python is viewed as a ubiquitous programming language; however, its
design limits its potential as a reliable and high performance systems
language. Unfortunately, not every developer is aware of its
limitations."
As I currently do not have the necessary technical knowledge to
properly evaluate his claims, I thought I would ask those of you who
do. I have neither the knowledge or boB-hours to write a large
distributed system code base, but I am curious if Python is truly
limited for doing these in the ways he claims.
BTW, I am not trying to start (another) heated, emotional thread. You
guys do sometimes get carried away! I honestly just what to know the
truth of the matters out of my continuing to learn Python. I suspect
there is probably some truth in his claims, but I am not sure if he is
taking things out of their proper application contexts or not.
He's making the assertions that:
"dynamically typed" == "weakly typed"
and:
"strongly typed" == "statically typed"
They aren't equivalences.
Python is both dynamically typed _and_ strongly typed.
And static type checking gets you only so far. If you've added when you
should've subtracted, static type checking won't spot it.
Another point: a "wheel" is not a "source distribution" that requires a
compiler, it can include a pre-compiled binary.
At least in the Conclusion he says "It is still a useful and powerful
programming language when suited for its intended purposes."
Exactly.
It's not suited for realtime processing, etc, but, then, it was never
intended for that anyway.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
