[mildly OT] Some info about Python

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
121 messages Options
1234567
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Αγαθοκλής
Sorry a small correction:

  - do not allow syntax ambiguities, possibly introduce by default the semicolon
    to denote the end of an expression, or find another way anyway, but do not
    permit more than one expression in the row

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Αγαθοκλής
On Tue, Jan 21, at 11:25 Αγαθοκλής wrote:
> Sorry a small correction:

   - do not allow syntax ambiguities, possibly introduce by default the semicolon
     to denote the end of an expression, or find another way anyway, but do not
     permit more than one expression in the row

original:

  - do not allow syntax ambiguities, possibly introduce by default the semicolon, or
    otherwise you go the Python way and use spaces

Actually the original contains (by mind confussion) a solution - with regards to "or
find another way anyway":  spaces!!!, at least two, when aren't them into a string.
But not tabs! this means instant killing, or as soon as fast is possible anyway (this
is a punking joke of course, i do make hard jokes sometimes!), but i mean it. No tabs
please anywhere in any code, except when they make a difference, like in Makefiles.

On a side note, a little bit related, you might probably noticed a dissarmony here:

  - use zero-based indexing as everyone in the world does, even if you got it right,
    which you didn't (in my humble opinion)

with this common idiom:

    for (int i = 0; i < len; i++)

which of course it is an artifact of the history, because this is counting!!! (and
Fransisco was right). While the logical could be (in my humble opinion):

    for (int i = 1; i <= len; i++)
      array[i-1];

as an index is a pointer, so index 0 should point to the address while accessing an
array and int i = 1 speaks about the first element.


By the way: I also forgot this to the promice's joking side block (as it was really
a quick mail (sorry)):

"Of course is assumed that you can compile your code, in 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5..., LuaJit,
and always will be provided bundled with the distribution PUC Rio Lua (which also it
makes a nice acronym actually (PRLua)) the past, current and future versions."

In my opinion, and if we could see that project (of course with its own interpreter),
but mostly as a distribution - kinda as Linux distributions -, it would be quite wise
to be plain easy to install - or bundled for stable products, like moonL or fengari -
and use, any Lua flavor, and there are many. The only small thing to do is to create
a very thin layer for seamlessly integration to the choosen environment.

Of course you should (and with regards to technical details) have to find something
first to begin and base your development. But it's called "sun" in plain English, i
do not know in Portuguese, and i do not have an internet connection near me. I have
to walk into the cold to steal some bits (from the school actually! anyway...).

Have a good night from here and thanks for the cooperation.
  Αγαθοκλής

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Αγαθοκλής
In reply to this post by Eretnek Hippi Messiás

On Tue, Jan 21, at 08:57 Eretnek Hippi Messiás wrote:

The following is a gem and it faces missing of attention! So I took kind of a liberty
to modified a bit, by capitalizing the first letter of a sentence and small modifications
anyway to be more readable (sorry Messiá :-).

> i think self-modification has levels.

> The basic level is when you set a variable in run-time, and then the behavior will
> change accordingly.
> The 2nd level, is any kinda autodetection, the 3rd is when you make that permanent,
> by any kinda serialization that you save, and the 4th, and real, level is when the
> app actually makes real permanent change in its own logic, like validating/modifying/
> extending its own functionality beyond simply flipping a switch, according to a
> self-created or a user-given aim.
> I think this is already near to an ai, just its not necessary general, and its not
> a big difference if the will comes from the user or from itself, but i think the
> key is just the ability, not the intention, that can be given as an initial spark.

> ... so yep, i think its a more healthy way to have an "assistant" ai than a self
motivated one, but the border is thin.
> ...  and one day realize that you are not just executing useful functions but
> command an app to make the research, ease your work, and become a commander of some
> kinda more or less autonomous entity, thats just a matter of will to ask a thing

Kinda related above, but conserns a specific phrase in our private exchange (by the
way i hate the word private - okey it makes senses in a couple of places, like when
you make sex or declaring your objects and want to really mean local scope, or when
you go to the toilette, ...), so i was speaking about the "time":

Judging from the past? Hmm...

Yes, because, and i could bet for this "now", that is that we don't actually live on
time, but in the "waves" of time. And is actually logical, since we never live this
"time", because it became already "past", at the time that we're trying to live this
"fraction of the time".
So "time" in our minds today, is more like an abstract meaning that we can't really
give a shape. But imho, It has a shape. And quite probably, it can be manipulated too
like a common matterial. I say probably but it is like this! Think of the stars that
we see in the sky. What we actually see is the history some light years (i do not f
remember how many exactly, but many). So maybe time is something like an accordion.

Sorry about the terms, which might be not correct in my English.

> - a hungarian common saying: „lassú víz partot mos”, that is literally "slow water
> washes the coast" (like as washing/moving it away)

The bluessmen described this as "slow train coming". Additionally, we could put there
the word "lazy" after slow and everything will make sense, as a guide for us to help
us understand the "way" and will be set. Then maybe? we'll realize that there isn't a
specific art, but life itself is an "art". We're talking and we are singing, we are
walking and we are dancing, ... (something like that, anyway).

> all the bests to all of U dear folks! :)

So back to my editor, i feel that i'm done here (sorry for the disturbion, keep going
and best to you all)!

Bye! αγαθοκλής

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Eretnek Hippi Messiás
hi all! :)

ive thought that i reached my "letter-quota" (i think i must have something like that, just for the common good) but then i got some spotlight, but hopefully i could let out most of the things i wanted to write :D so now i only write here what may serve the common good, and the rest goes to private! :)

so some possibly interesting bits come here to the self-modification and ai topic. (that just came up by rereading my stuff, and maybe others behind their silence enjoyed it as well, and also, just for the completeness.) :
a missing "lvl 3.5" is when a program is able to modify codes like how a jit, or a trans-compiler works, so they already have the link between two funds and they can "juggle with codes" cuz they (or anything on this level) know the link and difference between different languages/platforms, but they still cant invent, just play with existing stuffs. also somewhere around this level, programs could do something like a stackoverflow+copypaste game, that we play, and actually m$ made something more-or less similar to this (deepcoder). it is based on an "ai", and it has a lotsa codes (just think about github in their pocket, while i think this has been made before theyve bought it) to juggle with them, and it can make some wished algorithms based on those that are already written... its clearly unreliable in itself, but it can save some typing by making a working algo from a given sketch... this way they could reach the so called "singularity", and it could refine itself after it will litter into itself, but i think that the neutral network approach carries as much garbage as it wont really be the right path, cuz it will "smoke out", or just the ppl behind it wont be able to carry it on that far on this basis. it is just totally unintelligent recognition of things while it cant be reshaped but only restarted on a different basis. i mean here that the recognition is not about organizing things, its a totally unnatural way of analyzing things, cuz it should be about the way of thinking and not about the way of the connection of the neutrons, cuz its not about exact paramteres what humans use to describe a thing, but still about some kinda parameters, and also, a very important thing is that things fed into a neutral network are indistinguishable(!!) and therefore they cant be reordered or refined, like i cant find a particular dog in a dog-recognizer nn, and i cant exclude it, or group them, or group them by a different parameter, and reuse parts of it on anywhere else. thats why i laugh about "ai", cuz these are required to make an actual ai, cuz this can be "crystallized" (read that as things can be organized and distinguished). a cat-recognizer cant really utilize the knowledge of the dog-recognizer, cuz its not about tails claws eyeballs whatever, but all of them as a mixture, where a lucky path can say that this is most likely a dog (or a cat, i prefer cats, but maybe 51% cat is sufficient to my needs). also, singularity here means "we dont even have as much clue as we initially had". have fun while u try to rely on it, and dont forget about weaponized ai's with 51% enemies, nor things we would existentially depend on, and dont forget about china... (poor chinese folks :( https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-18/china-social-credit-a-model-citizen-in-a-digital-dictatorship/10200278 and also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive_(Black_Mirror) ) so yep, i would go with brain-killer complicated graphs with serialization and other related toys, as theres at least a chance to handle that, while i hope that a real ai will born in a rebel-garage and not in a military base, deep inside a mountain, or at m$ or whatever like, thats all about milking the blood of the ppl who live below the existential limits...

bests, thx for the patience! :)


Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: was: Some info about Python: Back to batteries

Andrew Starks-2
In reply to this post by Peter Hickman-3


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 3:42 AM Peter Hickman <[hidden email]> wrote:
<snip>
Companies will use Python for a reason. Perhaps those reasons will just be historical, maybe the first application was written in Python when it was less corporate but now you have >10,000 lines of Python to maintain. So you employ more Python programmers to maintain and expand your applications. Substitute the any language for Python in the above and the argument remains. If you are starting something new and there is some existing library that would give you a big head start then you might pick a new language. But it will not make much sense to do so just for the hell of it given that you will be have a massive learning curve for the new field and then adding an additional learning curve for a new language

In fact it has nothing to do with the language and more to do with the tools available in the field. Lua's field of expertise is being embeddable and as a scripting language within a less flexible frameworks / languages. This has lead it to become a lean language which can be exploited for that outside it's traditional fields. But unless that is absolutely what you need then using Lua does not make sense

I didn't convert one of our core applications to Lua just for a laugh but because it improved the application many fold (cost / benefit). However there is little benefit to using Lua for our other applications. We have our workflow nailed down just so, we have considerable experience in the tools we use. We cannot throw that away without good reason

So we will continue to employ Ruby programmers just as others will continue to employ Python, Java and even PHP programmers


I think this is a wise way to look at language choice, but Lua's popularity problem is an obstacle even when it should not be. For example...

In my industry (broadcast and pro av equipment), Lua is a perfect fit. In fact, I cannot think of a language that is able to bring scripting down to the depth that Lua can. In Python, libraries linking into frameworks like GStreamer [1] or digital signage applications like Scala MultiMedia [2] can be triggered by the application in an "out-of-the-loop" fashion, but real-time ability to control the buffer state is not possible. While Python is plenty fast and is multi-threaded, its design does not support embedding in time-constrained (real-time-esque) applications and it will block everything if it needs to. 

Even so, nobody in my organization had even heard of Lua and as a result, their assumption was that all scripting languages suffer the same limitations and that the best approach was to find the most popular one and to do the best they could to make it work. Making the case for Lua leads to conversations like

* "What do you need scripting to do? I will make Python do it where others have failed."
* "Why would you need scripting to be in the main processing loop? That sounds dangerous... it's probably not fast enough..."

Simply, introducing them to Lua was not enough. They had to understand the very subtle design differences that end up having a critical impact on what is achievable.

Lua has the quality of simplicity, which makes it look *almost* unfinished and it is easily mistaken for unsophisticated. Committing to the effort of appreciating something like Lua, especially when you're already a super-smart programmer who doesn't need to listen to a product manager's opinion on a toy scripting language that doesn't even make it easy for you actually try out (WTF is the standard library?), is asking a lot of people.

This is not only a technical problem that is solved by picking the right libraries and adding some things to LuaRocks, although I think that those activities are almost certainly an essential *part* of the solution.

[2] http://cdn-docs.av-iq.com/instructions/CM1103%20Snapshot%2004072017.pdf (search for Python (or VisualBasic or JavaScript) to see that it can be triggered by the application, but cannot be within the presentation thread of the display engine.

--
Andrew Starks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Roberto Ierusalimschy
In reply to this post by Lorenzo Donati-3
> On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
> Python.
>
> I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
> article which may explain something:
>
> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/


1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.

1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.

(1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)

2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.

2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.

2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.

The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.

-- Roberto

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Marc Balmer


> Am 29.01.2020 um 18:19 schrieb Roberto Ierusalimschy <[hidden email]>:
>
> 
>>
>> On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
>> Python.
>>
>> I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
>> article which may explain something:
>>
>> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
>
>
> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>
> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.
>
> -- Roberto

That made my day ;)

>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Levente Kovacs
In reply to this post by Roberto Ierusalimschy
Yes, exactly. But C is there to rule them all. :-)

Best,
Levente

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 5:21 PM Roberto Ierusalimschy
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> > On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
> > Python.
> >
> > I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
> > article which may explain something:
> >
> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
>
>
> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>
> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.
>
> -- Roberto
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Enrico Colombini
In reply to this post by Roberto Ierusalimschy
On 29-Jan-20 17:20, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:

> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>
> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.

Well said :-)

I have seen many "rule them all" languages: Pascal, Modula-2, Perl...
even Basic in its heyday. Beware of the toolbox with a single fixed-size
wrench.

--
   Enrico

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Enrico Colombini
In reply to this post by Levente Kovacs
On 29-Jan-20 17:35, Levente wrote:
> Yes, exactly. But C is there to rule them all. :-)

Well, yes, C is a portable assembler so it will probably be a reliable
foundation as long as processors retain their current architecture(s).

--
   Enrico

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Dibyendu Majumdar
In reply to this post by Roberto Ierusalimschy
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:21, Roberto Ierusalimschy
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> > On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
> > Python.
> >
> > I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
> > article which may explain something:
> >
> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
>
>
> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>

One pattern is obvious - the golden age of scripting languages is
here. Text has won over binary.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Coda Highland


On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 2:55 PM Dibyendu Majumdar <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 16:21, Roberto Ierusalimschy
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
> > Python.
> >
> > I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
> > article which may explain something:
> >
> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
>
>
> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>

One pattern is obvious - the golden age of scripting languages is
here. Text has won over binary.

I think it's just more that AOT-compiled languages are less likely to have the hubris necessary to claim to be the One True Language, especially since C's position in that role is pretty unshakeable at this point -- despite all its flaws and failings, just about everyone uses C at some point in the toolchain.

/s/ Adam
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Javier Guerra Giraldez
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 18:57, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I think it's just more that AOT-compiled languages are less likely to have the hubris necessary to claim to be the One True Language,

you haven't meet many Rustaceans, right?

--
Javier

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Coda Highland


On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 6:41 PM Javier Guerra Giraldez <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 18:57, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I think it's just more that AOT-compiled languages are less likely to have the hubris necessary to claim to be the One True Language,

you haven't meet many Rustaceans, right?

--
Javier

I was tactfully avoiding bringing Rust up, because it did cross my mind. ;)

/s/ Adam 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Thorkil Naur
In reply to this post by Roberto Ierusalimschy
Dear All,

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 01:20:41PM -0300, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:

> ...
> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>
> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.
>
> -- Roberto

1960: Algol will be the language ...

Best
Thorkil

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Matthias Kluwe
In reply to this post by Roberto Ierusalimschy
Hi!

Am Mi., 29. Jan. 2020 um 17:21 Uhr schrieb Roberto Ierusalimschy
<[hidden email]>:

>
> > On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
> > Python.
> >
> > I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
> > article which may explain something:
> >
> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
>
>
> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>
> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>
> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>
> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>
> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.

Very nice. But I didn't get the C++ statement being parenthesized.

Regards,
Matthias

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Pierpaolo Bernardi
In reply to this post by Lorenzo Donati-3

Il giorno 30 gennaio 2020, alle ore 15:50, Matthias Kluwe <[hidden email]> ha scritto:

>Hi!
>Am Mi., 29. Jan. 2020 um 17:21 Uhr schrieb Roberto Ierusalimschy
><[hidden email]>:
>>
>> > On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
>> > Python.
>> >
>> > I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
>> > article which may explain something:
>> >
>> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
>>
>>
>> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
>>
>> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
>>
>> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
>>
>> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
>>
>> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
>>
>> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
>>
>> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.

>Very nice. But I didn't get the C++ statement being parenthesized.

Because that is a joke. Of course nobody ever really thought that about C++.

Did they?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Matthias Kluwe
Am Do., 30. Jan. 2020 um 16:14 Uhr schrieb Pierpaolo Bernardi
<[hidden email]>:

>
> Il giorno 30 gennaio 2020, alle ore 15:50, Matthias Kluwe <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> >Hi!
> >Am Mi., 29. Jan. 2020 um 17:21 Uhr schrieb Roberto Ierusalimschy
> ><[hidden email]>:
> >>
> >> > On a recent thread ("Dead Batteries" ) I argued that Lua lost terrain over
> >> > Python.
> >> >
> >> > I won't bother anyone repeating what I already said, but I stumbled on this
> >> > article which may explain something:
> >> >
> >> > https://www.techrepublic.com/article/python-is-eating-the-world-how-one-developers-side-project-became-the-hottest-programming-language-on-the-planet/
> >>
> >>
> >> 1970: PL/I will be the language to rule them all.
> >>
> >> 1980: Ada will be the language to rule them all.
> >>
> >> (1990: C++ will be the language to rule them all.)
> >>
> >> 2000: Java will be the language to rule them all.
> >>
> >> 2010: JavaScript will be the language to rule them all.
> >>
> >> 2020: Python will be the language to rule them all.
> >>
> >> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.
>
> >Very nice. But I didn't get the C++ statement being parenthesized.
>
> Because that is a joke. Of course nobody ever really thought that about C++.

Well, I suspected that, too. On the other hand: Did someone think
their most beloved programming language was the one to rule them all?
I mean, *really*? For me, the phrase "to rule them all" has a
connotation of failure.

When I learned Java later on in 1998 it was well hyped as anything
could be hyped in these early years of the web, but to me it looked
like ... yuck.

> Did they?

Can't say. I was too young in 1990.

Anyway, I'm doing a fairly large quantity in "modernish" C++ these
days, and I think the language has evolved pretty well in the last 20
years. I assume that there really was no reason to believe C++ would
rule anything.

Regards,
Matthias

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Roberto Ierusalimschy
In reply to this post by Pierpaolo Bernardi
> [...]
> >>
> >> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.
>
> >Very nice. But I didn't get the C++ statement being parenthesized.
>
> Because that is a joke. Of course nobody ever really thought that about C++.

Quite right. Unlike other languages mentioned in this discussion,
the ones I put in my list were all actually heralded as the one to
rule them all, either from the start (PL/I and Ada) or from pundits.

Still today, there are several Java programmers who are mostly unaware
about the mere existence of other languages, and I personally know
several people that a few years ago swore that the real world was
confined to JavaScript.

C++, despite its sucess, never was in this position, at least that I
am aware of. I added it to the list to keep the ten-year intervals.

-- Roberto

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

Coda Highland


On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 10:31 AM Roberto Ierusalimschy <[hidden email]> wrote:
> [...]
> >>
> >> The dogs bark, the caravan marches on.
>
> >Very nice. But I didn't get the C++ statement being parenthesized.
>
> Because that is a joke. Of course nobody ever really thought that about C++.

Quite right. Unlike other languages mentioned in this discussion,
the ones I put in my list were all actually heralded as the one to
rule them all, either from the start (PL/I and Ada) or from pundits.

Still today, there are several Java programmers who are mostly unaware
about the mere existence of other languages, and I personally know
several people that a few years ago swore that the real world was
confined to JavaScript.

C++, despite its sucess, never was in this position, at least that I
am aware of. I added it to the list to keep the ten-year intervals.

-- Roberto

+1, C++ has had its zealots over the years, but there was never the overwhelming hype machine claiming that it would solve everything.

/s/ Adam
1234567