Zed just needs to be at war with something.
The Case Against Python 3
21–30 of 281 posts
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#22This author is nuts.
"Python" and "dead language" in same sentence? Maybe if it was Perl or Java, I'd have understood.
P.S: I'm really sorry Java guys, I know Java isn't going to die, atleast not for another 100 years, but since I don't like it much, I'm putting it in the list here.
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#23Python was one of the first languages I've tried I actually enjoyed programming in. I hope to continue leveraging my investment in learning python by using it for a long time. So far I haven't been forced to use Python 3. I've tried a few times but always found it easier to just go back to python (2.7). I figure eventually I have to use Python 3 but at this point, my life has been fine without upgrading to python3.
I think Python is amazing to get small stuff ip and running and quick scripts, but it quickly becomes a nightmare as the project scales up.
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#24Howdy Zed, there's a small typo in your printf statement. As written,
x = 'Zed'
print f"Howdy {x}"
x = 'Zed'
printf "Howdy {x}"
print q{Howdy Zend};Re: The Case Against Python 3
#25> In the programming language theory there is this basic requirement that, given a "complete" programming language, I can run any other programming language. In the world of Java I'm able to run Ruby, Java, C++, C, and Lua all at the same time. In the world of Microsoft I can run F#, C#, C++, and Python all at the same time. This isn't just a theoretical thing. There is solid math behind it. Math that is truly the foundation of computer science.
What does this even mean?
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#26> The fact that you can't run Python 2 and Python 3 at the same time I'm confused by this statement. I can start a python2 interpreter, background it, then start a python3 interpreter. Is there some other area that they inhibit each other in?
No, unless you really try to confound them together
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#27> The fact that you can't run Python 2 and Python 3 at the same time I'm confused by this statement. I can start a python2 interpreter, background it, then start a python3 interpreter. Is there some other area that they inhibit each other in?
It sounds like the author's just miffed about incompatibilities in general -- specifically, that they can't (necessarily) import python 2 code whilst running under a python 3 interpreter and vice versa.
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#28So many inaccuracies and exaggerations that it feels sarcastic.
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#29Zed just needs to be at war with something.
The thing about Zed is that his shtick was originally a joke: a parody of overconfident asshole programmers. But... well, like Orwell said, "He wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it."
Re: The Case Against Python 3
#30Howdy Zed, there's a small typo in your printf statement. As written, x = 'Zed' print f"Howdy {x}" Should read, x = 'Zed' printf "Howdy {x}" I was under the suspicion that, "f" was some sort of operator or something, much like q is for Perl, print q{Howdy Zend};
No, it's correct (new in Python 3.6):
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0498/
The print statement however is not valid Python 3 :).