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

Why Python is Important for You

blaag.haard.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 231 posts

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#121

Post by sunqiang »

jshen wrote: post #79
Daishiman wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that the policy of rapid movement it has its ups and downsides; Python code is generally very stable between versions and breakage is well-documented. So far I haven't seen the same thing going on in Ruby land. JRuby is clearly more advanced that Jython. I'm guessing that with the advance of PyPy, other Python interpreters just aren't getting that much attention, which is a bit unfortunate.

rapid movement definitely has it's downsides. However, I don't know what you mean when you say that ruby code isn't stable between versions. Do you mean between versions of ruby? If so, again, the transition from ruby 1.8 to ruby 1.9 was much much better than the transition from python 2 to python 3.

Python 2 to Python 3 is a big jump once in a lifetime. what about ruby 1.9 to ruby 2.0?

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#122

Post by bconway »

wging wrote: post #11

As a commenter on the article wrote: what about Ruby? I say this as a happy Python user. Ruby seems very similar but I'm reminded of a pg essay on language power: looking up the power curve, you see '$Language plus a bit of weird stuff that is probably irrelevant.' So I don't trust myself. As someone who loves Python and doesn't know any Ruby beyond a few bits of syntax and the obvious bits that are common to most la…

As the author points out, a huge standard library. Sure, Ruby has everything you need if you pull in this gem and that gem, but you better hope the gem you need is working that week or you're going to waste a lot of time reading Github logs and back-tracking revisions.

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#123

Post by thehotelambush »

codesuela wrote: post #94
thehotelambush wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used Python for a really long time and switched to Ruby several months ago. Benefits of Ruby are: -no distinction between expression and statement (everything has a value) -lambdas can thus contain any expression -much bigger range of built-in methods and classes (all permutations of a list, removing duplicates from a list, Rational class, Regexp class, Range class, etc.) -more flexible syntax and "control operator…

> -lambdas can thus contain any expression why would you want to use lambdas if you have generator expressions? eg: map(lambda c: c.strip(), countries.split(',')) vs [c.strip() for c in countries.split(',')] IMHO the latter one is way more readable and generators cover almost all the use cases for lambdas. If you could not do it with a generator expression and choose to use a anonymous function it should have been a…

Thanks for mentioning sets - this is another thing that I would like to be built-in in Ruby. But "list(set(mylist))" seems like kind of a hack.

> you can import the rational class via a simple from fractions import Fraction

Sure, you can write a library for anything and by now Python has libraries for most everything. But it still makes a difference to have things in the core language, plus a nice syntax for them.

> why would you want to use lambdas if you have generator expressions?

This is a case of making up for odd semantic choices with special syntax, which then becomes an unnecessarily fixed-in-stone part of the language. Range objects in Ruby are actually like slice objects in Python. But Ruby separates the syntax for ranges from the get-item method, since there are plenty of other places where you would want to use ranges (then you can iterate and map over them, etc.).

Ruby uses blocks to implement things like an each method that fulfills the same function as Python's for statement. (Ruby has a for statement but it is hardly ever used.) In Ruby your example would be

countries.split(',').map &:strip

which is obviously more concise and no less readable. Compare with

countries.split(',').each &:foo

where foo is some side-effectful method.

IMO such a small change in behavior should result in a similarly small change in how the program is written.

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#124

Post by lelele »

berntb wrote: post #31
espeed wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Library support. For example, there really is no Ruby equivalent to SciPy, NumPy, Matplotlib or NLTK ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3179370 ). However, there has been some effort in the Ruby community to begin the process of developing some of these libraries (see SciRuby http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3180369 ). but the Python libraries have been in development for years so this will be no easy feat.

>> Library support. Isn't that rather an argument for Java or Perl? What I don't get is the cheerleading for Python? Ruby has/had something similar going with Rails. I mean, the article even notes that it is a middle of the road choice, optimised to not be extreme.

> Isn't that rather an argument for Java or Perl?

No, because then you'd have to stand either Java or Perl. If you are looking for a language to learn beyond a quick hack, then the language matters more than its libraries. I know Perl, and everybody knows what a boon CPAN is, but still for scripting tasks I have switched to Python. It would have made me feel sick to keep programming in Perl.

As I had to choose between Python and Ruby too, besides the library thing, I picked Python because Ruby seemed like it was trying too hard to be powerful and expressive, to the detriment of clarity. I didn't want to invest too much time in learning a scripting language. It's just for scripting, you know, it's not meant to accomplish much. If I need a powerful and expressive language, then I just reach for the big guns.

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#125

Post by nostrademons »

kevinburke wrote: post #93

When I was at Google there was a paper titled "Please don't use Python for large programs." Can someone post that? It would be an interesting counterpoint.

I don't think it's public. In any case, its argument basically boiled down to "Python doesn't have static types, without static types it's too hard to communicate API information between programmers, Google has thousands of programmers that need to communicate, so please don't use Python."

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#126

Post by chernevik »

wging wrote: post #11

As a commenter on the article wrote: what about Ruby? I say this as a happy Python user. Ruby seems very similar but I'm reminded of a pg essay on language power: looking up the power curve, you see '$Language plus a bit of weird stuff that is probably irrelevant.' So I don't trust myself. As someone who loves Python and doesn't know any Ruby beyond a few bits of syntax and the obvious bits that are common to most la…

Ruby/Rails seems to have a more developer-friendly approach to the web development stack than Python/Django. (I am but an egg, more comfortable in Python/Django but learning Ruby/Rails, I wouldn't argue with more experienced folks about any of the following.)

Ruby/Rails seems easier to develop and test the full stack application, from client JavaScript to server Ruby response and back. It supports Ajax through injection of injection of JavaScript into HTTP responses served up, based on specifications in server side code. The test architectures seem to reach across the client/server divide, for example checking server side responses to triggering client-side JavaScript.

Python/Django are trying, with like lettuce and splinter, but these don't yet seem to be quite to the same standard.

Also, because RoR has a lead on web development, new developments in that space seem generally better integrated. For example, Backbone is a young JavaScript MVC style framework for client side development. I've just been fooling with using it with Django, and discovered that its stringification of Json objects for POST doesn't work with Django's parsing of the client request. Maybe more experienced developers spotted and fixed this easily -- my fix is only a couple of lines -- but it's the sort of thing that makes me wonder just how many folks have tried to integrate Django w/ Backbone. I'm guessing that the Backbone community has already spotted and fixed any such issues with RoR.

Now I'm not sure how I feel about RoR, it often feels like magic and I'm a little suspicious of stuff like super-convenient JavaScript injection. Maybe when I understand it better it will seems less magical and more convenient. But it isn't hard to see why the web development community likes it.

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#127

Post by buster »

pnathan wrote: post #103

I have a list I wrote up once about Python's problems. Some of these are more exotic than others. Most of them are kludgearoundable. A couple are fixed in Python 3. Some are simply design choices that are exactly different from my mental model of the world, and due to the TOOWTDI Python world, it is frustrating to work with them. Some Things Wrong With Python * Immutable strings[0] * Everything a reference[1] * Envir…

I stopped when i found "Lack of braces" in your list. If you don't like it.. fine.. but it's in my opinion a major plus for python. Also "everything is a reference" is 1) not true for everything and 2) a smart thing to do. Many languages do that.

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#128

Post by sunqiang »

kevinburke wrote: post #93

When I was at Google there was a paper titled "Please don't use Python for large programs." Can someone post that? It would be an interesting counterpoint.

what type of paper, Google's coding policy? there is a mail-list post, https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/unladen-s...

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#129

Post by jamesbritt »

tripzilch wrote: post #71
wging wrote: post #11

As a commenter on the article wrote: what about Ruby? I say this as a happy Python user. Ruby seems very similar but I'm reminded of a pg essay on language power: looking up the power curve, you see '$Language plus a bit of weird stuff that is probably irrelevant.' So I don't trust myself. As someone who loves Python and doesn't know any Ruby beyond a few bits of syntax and the obvious bits that are common to most la…

Some many years ago I decided I should learn a new scripting language because PHP wasn't general-purpose enough. I decided it would be either Python, Ruby or Perl. For some reason Perl was dropped early, I forget why (don't worry I learned some Perl later). So I started Googling for Python vs Ruby. After checking some language basics tutorials, I decided that really, for my purposes they were about equivalent in powe…

Also, just a little disclaimer: This was a couple of years back (I forget how many, 5 or so) maybe the Ruby community changed, and it's also totally possible that I just happened to land on a rather "particular" region of the Ruby blogosphere, so take this cum grano salis. I had to make a choice and was about this close to just flipping a coin over it :)

ruby-talk used to have, as one of a number of perma-threads, the question of "Why Ruby over Python". The discussion was almost always entirely civil, with most people suggesting that the questioner try both for a bit and pick the one that clicked best.

I used to host (on ruby-doc.org) a page called "Ruby Eye for the Python Guy" that tried to summarise the comments and offer links to help folks make a decision.

The community on ruby-talk at that time (probably 5 years ago) was extremely polite and helpful, and I'm sorry you landed on some opinionated blog that likely only reflected a small group of developers.

I don't follow ruby-talk much any more, so I can't say how it is, but there has always been a pretty strong tradition of MINSWAN: "matz is nice so we are nice." I expect that's still encouraged. There are, of course, various sub-groups around this or that library or framework that may have zero exposure to that, think they're the shit, etc., but I hope people considering Ruby don't a priori dismiss the majority of Rubyists as rude because of bad reports about a handful of people.

OK, end of Ruby PSA.

Side note: I'm often puzzled by people who think a language or framework or whatever geek thing has to "win." Be happy for happy people.

Re: Why Python is Important for You

#130

Post by jamesbritt »

berntb wrote: post #31
espeed wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Library support. For example, there really is no Ruby equivalent to SciPy, NumPy, Matplotlib or NLTK ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3179370 ). However, there has been some effort in the Ruby community to begin the process of developing some of these libraries (see SciRuby http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3180369 ). but the Python libraries have been in development for years so this will be no easy feat.

>> Library support. Isn't that rather an argument for Java or Perl? What I don't get is the cheerleading for Python? Ruby has/had something similar going with Rails. I mean, the article even notes that it is a middle of the road choice, optimised to not be extreme.

Isn't that rather an argument for Java or Perl?

Or JRuby.

Post reply on HN