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

Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 44 posts

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#11

Post by bmitc »

williamstein wrote: post #6
bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

And yet it is one of the top 10 most popular languages. There might be something to learn from the discipline and balance of not pushing the boundaries of programming too hard?

I don't think that conclusion follows. Yes, it's popular. No, Python is not disciplined nor balanced. Popularity is really more about social dynamics than anything.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#12

Post by bmitc »

doix wrote: post #8
bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

It's worth pointing out that Python is 30ish years old at this point. It's "outstanding features" were creating a syntax that a lot of people can quickly grok (not just programmers) and the way they allowed for extensions to be written in C. I believe it also popularized the concept of "there should be one obvious way of doing things", in stark contrast with Perl; "there's more than one way to skin a cat". It's easy…

Python doesn't really even follow that maxim itself. Also, even at the time of Python's creation, it ignored the influence of more disciplined languages (i.e., MLs, Smalltalks, Lisps, Schemes) and refused to adopt such influence over its lifetime. Guido van Rossum famously stated that `functools` is where he put things he didn't (doesn't) care about. I don't think that even now he understands functional-first programming.

All that being said, Python's age is irrelevant when discussing the future of programming.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#13

Post by lhuser123 »

doix wrote: post #8
bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

It's worth pointing out that Python is 30ish years old at this point. It's "outstanding features" were creating a syntax that a lot of people can quickly grok (not just programmers) and the way they allowed for extensions to be written in C. I believe it also popularized the concept of "there should be one obvious way of doing things", in stark contrast with Perl; "there's more than one way to skin a cat". It's easy…

> creating a syntax that a lot of people can quickly grok (not just programmers)

This. We tend to underestimate what it takes to create something easy to use.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#14

Post by neilmock »

bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

Python did introduce more love, kindness, and empathy into the world.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#15

Post by remram »

neilmock wrote: post #14
bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

Python did introduce more love, kindness, and empathy into the world.

Did it? At this point what it's famous for is the 2-to-3 drama and the 20 competing packaging tools and standards.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#16

Post by sholladay »

bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

Do you believe that AI / machine learning will play an increasingly important role in future technology? Because if so, Python is the go-to language for such work. Sure, some of that is due to human factors and not just language features, but Python makes AI and scientific computing easy and that work will influence Python’s development and vice versa.

Personally, as long as I have a good linter, I prefer JavaScript for general purpose programming but there are some areas where other languages just dominate.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#19

Post by camdenreslink »

bmitc wrote: post #11
williamstein wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet it is one of the top 10 most popular languages. There might be something to learn from the discipline and balance of not pushing the boundaries of programming too hard?

I don't think that conclusion follows. Yes, it's popular. No, Python is not disciplined nor balanced. Popularity is really more about social dynamics than anything.

I don’t know about social dynamics unless you mean most programs in the world aren’t written by senior software engineers. Python is easy to understand to write a script or small web service. Scala or Haskell can never be the most popular for that exact reason.

Re: Guido van Rossum: Python and the Future of Programming – Lex Fridman Podcast

#20

Post by Qem »

bmitc wrote: post #4

Does Python or van Rossum really have anything interesting to say on the future of programming? Python has libraries and lots of users and hype, and those are really its only outstanding "features". Python really does nothing interesting when I think of pushing the boundaries of programming.

I think just by inertia we will end with future languages copying Python syntax and spreading its influence, just like lots of languages copied C syntax after it got popular.
Post reply on HN