Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 150 posts

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#91

Post by smoe »

microtonal wrote: post #54
kalefranz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to [this]( https://stackoverflow.blog/2017/09/06/incredible-growth-pyth... ) Stack Overflow study: "Python stands alone as a tag that is both large and growing rapidly; the next-largest tag that shows similar growth is R."

I would really be careful to use StackOverflow statistics as a proxy of language popularity. There are many ways that Python's relative popularity compared to Java on StackOverflow can be explained. For example: Python is used more by hobbyist programmers, hence more questions about it. Or: Java is taught in many universities, so people generally have fewer questions about Java. If you go outside this filter bubble a…

I wouldn't argue that Java is a lot bigger than Python in real world adaption. But the Stackoverflow graph that was posted above looks at growth over the last past 5 years.

I have been working with Python for 12 years and only in the last few did I get the impression that it is a popular language. For example when I'm interviewing candidates for a junior dev position, pretty much all of them have at least some Python experience from University, whereas when I started all the fellow Python programmers either learned it on the job or in their spare time.

I do agree that StackOverflow isn't a good proxy, but I could image Python getting more new regular users than Java at the moment.

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#92

Post by pjmlp »

orf wrote: post #88
pjmlp wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am yet to work for any customer that cares about git for example, so not even private repos. So far my use of git has been on personal projects.

I guess you just work for a poor quality of customer?

Fortune 500 companies.

Quality is debatable.

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#93

Post by benji-york »

_sdegutis wrote: post #79
developer2 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot I like about Python, but there are a couple of things that they've gotten so horribly wrong. 1. The KeyboardInterrupt exception for SIGINT. Whoever came up with that idea destroyed the credibility of the entire interpreter. Python falls flat on its face to me because of this one design choice. It's impossible to write a Python script that will not dump a full debug stack trace if you send SIGINT (ie: Ct…

As a minor nitpick it bugs me a lot that there are no truly anonymous functions. You either have to use a lambda which is limited to expressions, or name a function and use it as a first class object. Every other language in the same domain has this feature.

You might enjoy Coconut (http://coconut-lang.org/).

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#94

Post by pjmlp »

orf wrote: post #89
pjmlp wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The day Python performance gets good enough for companies to even think about doing a complete OS userspace on it, maybe. Until then, no.

That's.... Ridiculous.

Ridiculous is suggesting Python is capable of replacing Java in what concerns performance.

Specially when it needs extensions written in C or C++ for anything that requires it.

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#95

Post by DiThi »

kvz wrote: post #86
davesque wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're probably joking but, just for kicks and to provide some historical context, my guess is email. I seem to recall that attachment sizes would have been limited to something less than that back then. Also, 1.76 MB could have fit onto two HD floppies which would have made it easy to snail mail. Although it wouldn't have been all that hard to download with a 14.4 modem.

Hold up! Didn’t the floppies I remember store 1.44MB for us?

Or 1.38 MiB. Parent said _two_ floppies.

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#96

Post by orf »

pjmlp wrote: post #92
orf wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you just work for a poor quality of customer?

Fortune 500 companies. Quality is debatable.

> Quality is debatable.

Using a VCS is not though.

And sure, you didn't say they didn't, but using SVN or CVS in 2017 isn't good (outside of a very few select situations/industries).

Don't be proud of working for large, slow moving companies with poor tech choices. They don't use git yet but they will.

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#97

Post by KindOne »

RayDonnelly wrote: post #74
meatbundragon wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this not work with Ubuntu on Windows? I've been using it as my primary development environment and it seems to work perfectly with the mainstream Ubuntu/linux software I deal with. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/about

While we fix bugs in our Linux packages so they work on USW/WSL this one appears to have problems (and I do not expect I will look into them any time soon): Python 1.0.1 (Mar 26 2014) Copyright 1991-1994 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam Segmentation fault (core dumped) .. I did capture the backtrace though; for what it's worth: (gdb) bt #0 0x00000000004212bb in do_mkvalue () #1 0x00000000004210a7 in do_mktup…

Do a 'bt full'?

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#98

Post by orf »

pjmlp wrote: post #94
orf wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's.... Ridiculous.

Ridiculous is suggesting Python is capable of replacing Java in what concerns performance. Specially when it needs extensions written in C or C++ for anything that requires it.

Ridiculous is thinking you could write a whole OS userspace in Java.

Ridiculous is making that comment without realising Python is a core part of most modern *nix userspace. try uninstalling Python on a default Ubuntu/Fedora/Centos install and see what still works. I would suggest trying the same with Java, but nobody bundles that by default despite it's JIT.

Ridiculous is pontificating about how useless Python is without C/C++, clearly without knowing much about the language and its strengths.

I've known people who say the same kind of things, who write reams of very poor, unidiomatic Python code and wonder why it's slow, not wanting to accept that it's their bad code that's slow!

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#99

Post by e12e »

kvz wrote: post #86
davesque wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're probably joking but, just for kicks and to provide some historical context, my guess is email. I seem to recall that attachment sizes would have been limited to something less than that back then. Also, 1.76 MB could have fit onto two HD floppies which would have made it easy to snail mail. Although it wouldn't have been all that hard to download with a 14.4 modem.

Hold up! Didn’t the floppies I remember store 1.44MB for us?

Linux could actually store more, as could some custom programs for dos iirc - ms dos had some conservative standards in place due to early floppies being less reliable I think. I initially became aware because the Amiga floppy drive/format was a superset of dos. You could (with appropriate software) read/write dos floppies on the amiga - but you couldn't read/write amiga floppies on pc hw (not even Linux, I think).

See "logical formats":

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_floppy_disk_formats

Re: Python 1.0.0 is out (1994)

#100

Post by granitosaurus »

e12e wrote: post #81
willtim wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C# does not in any way represent the best that static typing has to offer. Try F#, Haskell or OCaml seriously before discounting static typing. These functional languages offer much better safety (e.g. no nulls, no casts, case exhaustiveness) and are as succinct as Python. They also generalise a lot of features that are ad-hoc in C# and Python (e.g. async-await is a library in F# and Haskell). For me, using Haskell i…

I think the closest thing to "python with types" is probably Julia: https://julialang.org/ I think the efforts of adding type/type hints to python are interesting - but there's a tension between "weee! Look at me ducktyping, metaprogramming all the prototypes!!"-design and leveraging types as part of your design . Haskell/f#/ml are great languages, but they feel very different from python (ml maybe less so,but afaik…

There's also nim, which is rather new and not yet v1 worthy but I'd say it's still a worthy contender to the "closes thing to python with types"
Post reply on HN