Wow. That was quite a message and an interesting read. Tempted to go deep and say what I agree and what I disagree with, but there are two issues: 1) time 2) I will soon be at a disadvantage discussing with people (you or others) who know more than me (which doesn't make them right necessarily, but certainly they'll have the upper-hand in a discussion).
Personally, in the first part of my career I got into the habit of learning things fast, sometimes superficially I confess, and then get stuff done hopefully within time and budget. Not the recommended approach if you need to build software for a nuclear plant. An OK approach (within reason) if you build websites or custom solutions for this or that organization and the budget is what it is. After all, technology moves sooo fast, and what we learn in detail today is bound to be old and possibly useless 5 years down the road.
Also, I argue that there is value in having familiarity with lots of different technologies (front-end and back-end) and knowing (or at lease, having a sense) of how they can all be made play together with an appreciation of the different challenges and benefits that each domain offers.
Anyway, everything is equivalent to a Turing machine and IA will screw everyone, including programmers, eventually.
Thanks again and have a great day Dino On 1/25/2023 9:14 PM, avi.e.gr...@gmail.com wrote:
Dino, There is no such things as a "principle of least surprise" or if you insist there is, I can nominate many more such "rules" such as "the principle of get out of my way and let me do what I want!" Computer languages with too many rules are sometimes next to unusable in practical situations. I am neither defending or attacking choices Python or other languages have made. I merely observe and agree to use languages carefully and as documented.
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
