The Origins of Python
inference-review.com
The Origins of Python
1–10 of 73 posts
Re: The Origins of Python
#2Fascinating read, wasn't aware of this history of python. I thought the line about the fear of not having a copyright statement for ABC was interesting - and applies to many aspects of life in general where setting things free is the right thing to do but also scary.
Re: The Origins of Python
#3I feel Python changes and have changed too much to be a good introduction language anymore.
It is not possible for a from zero beginner to read ordinary Python code with decorators, generators or what not and understand it.
Way too many concepts.
It is being choose by intertia at this point and have been ruined for the original target user by former target users who are now professional programmers using it at work.
Re: The Origins of Python
#4I feel Python changes and have changed too much to be a good introduction language anymore. It is not possible for a from zero beginner to read ordinary Python code with decorators, generators or what not and understand it. Way too many concepts. It is being choose by intertia at this point and have been ruined for the original target user by former target users who are now professional programmers using it at work.
MicroPython or CircuitPython have become better entry points than the full language.
Python grew up and has been chosen to solve a lot of complex, important problems. This has lead to the language ballooning to become not just good but excellent for those problems (data science). Some of it might be fluff; much of it might not be relevant to your style or problem space.
Re: The Origins of Python
#5I feel Python changes and have changed too much to be a good introduction language anymore. It is not possible for a from zero beginner to read ordinary Python code with decorators, generators or what not and understand it. Way too many concepts. It is being choose by intertia at this point and have been ruined for the original target user by former target users who are now professional programmers using it at work.
MicroPython or CircuitPython have become better entry points than the full language. Python grew up and has been chosen to solve a lot of complex, important problems. This has lead to the language ballooning to become not just good but excellent for those problems (data science). Some of it might be fluff; much of it might not be relevant to your style or problem space.
Ye for the professional programmers using Python I guess the changes are welcome. It is easier to keep up with additions over time rather than getting them all at once. C++ has the same problem, but it's selling point has never been easy to use.
Re: The Origins of Python
#6I feel Python changes and have changed too much to be a good introduction language anymore. It is not possible for a from zero beginner to read ordinary Python code with decorators, generators or what not and understand it. Way too many concepts. It is being choose by intertia at this point and have been ruined for the original target user by former target users who are now professional programmers using it at work.
Ease of use and ease of learning are often at odds with performance.
A go-kart is easier to learn and to drive than a Formula 1 car.
Re: The Origins of Python
#7A well written article on the origins of Python without ever mentioning Monty Python[1].
Re: The Origins of Python
#8I feel Python changes and have changed too much to be a good introduction language anymore. It is not possible for a from zero beginner to read ordinary Python code with decorators, generators or what not and understand it. Way too many concepts. It is being choose by intertia at this point and have been ruined for the original target user by former target users who are now professional programmers using it at work.
Large code bases are always going to be hard to read for beginners.
As an introduction language, I don't see why you would need to use decorators, generators or anything? You don't need to learn control flow, functions, variables, etc. You can perfectly write python without all the fancy stuff. In fact, there are quite a lot of data scientists who are paid to write python and don't know the first thing about concepts as seemingly basic as classes.
Re: The Origins of Python
#9I feel Python changes and have changed too much to be a good introduction language anymore. It is not possible for a from zero beginner to read ordinary Python code with decorators, generators or what not and understand it. Way too many concepts. It is being choose by intertia at this point and have been ruined for the original target user by former target users who are now professional programmers using it at work.
I feel like python has never been a good introduction language. It is simply too abstract and hides too many details that are often required in other languages (Python is simply too flexible). It is good to learn if you are only scripting or calling library API, but I feel like it is a poor starting point if the goal is to transition into languages with more rigid structures such as C++.
Re: The Origins of Python
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
MicroPython or CircuitPython have become better entry points than the full language. Python grew up and has been chosen to solve a lot of complex, important problems. This has lead to the language ballooning to become not just good but excellent for those problems (data science). Some of it might be fluff; much of it might not be relevant to your style or problem space.
Ye for the professional programmers using Python I guess the changes are welcome. It is easier to keep up with additions over time rather than getting them all at once. C++ has the same problem, but it's selling point has never been easy to use.
I'm one of those people who worry that Python - which used to be pretty accessible - is heading in the same direction as C++, and will be buried under archaeological layers of cruft and obscurity.
2.x and 3.x seem to be diverging philosophically, and I'm not convinced that's a good thing.