On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 04:25:35 -0500, c186282 wrote:

>   But isn't  &&  and  ||  more better ? If the
>    meaning is more obscure then it MUST be better !

Perfectly obvious. BTW any language that can't do bit operations should be 
drowned at birth.

>    'R' ??? You must have some very special needs !

https://www.anaconda.com/blog/python-vs-r-data-science-ai-workflows

The article is biased but R at one time was more popular for machine 
learning. Python caught up rapidly. One of the problems with R is a sort 
of quirky syntax compared to most languages. With Python you can use 
TensorFlow and even if you don't know much about ML it looks like Python. 

Both are interpreted so aren't the speediest languages. R originally had 
an edge but as Python became more popular for ML packages like numpy were 
optimized. 

Note: I draw a distinction between ML and LLMs. All the hype is for LLMs 
and I'm not sure the balloon won't burst. ML is the poor relation but I 
think it has more real value to offer in many domains. 

-- 
https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/python-list.python.org

Reply via email to