Python becomes the most popular language

[Fred27]

Another potential discussion ruined by the usual suspects whining about why language x doesn't work for them because of y.

It's not a discussion unless you discuss it.

[madires]

Please don't get me wrong. Python is all over the place in network engineering, especially in automation which is quite complex. and most network engineers are able to cope with it despite not being software developers. Presumably they would be much less productive when writing code in C (not many are proficient in C). And that's also the big problem: tons of python code hacked together. If it's too slow then more CPU power is added.

[PKTKS]

this is a funky thread... 

Python found a niche very fast..
..even being a messy identated code piled together now there are are tons of usable stuff around..
every now fan boy put stuff together fast..

Sure it is slow.. very odd "object" like stuff put together..
... And a total pain to maintain a sane site among messy version...

Agreed with everybody else that RUBY is the perfect OO choice..

One level just after PERL obviously. Elegant, organized and much much more recommended for serious use..

Nevertheless only RubyOnRails seems to be attractive..

Once you cross the OO boundary on PERL there is no way back.

But obvisouly we can not ignore the Python niche in particular all those fan boys that a re coming from the pathetic windoozee  arena...

We need to live with this thing..
and to complicate things further..  obviously a strong effort was made/sponsored to replace GNU autotools with that MESON thing... sponsors succeeded on that..

GNU Autotools are PERL based and they do not run nice at all on no POSIXs like windoozee so VisualShit can not live with that.. MESON felt from the ether..

Paul

[mansaxel]

... I had to use Python recently as a scripting language within a product. (Python's good enough for scripting to be fair, it's just not a programming language.) You could use the internal textbox editor or edit in an external tool like Notepad++. One kept tabs, one converted tabs to spaces. Cue a subtle invisible run-time bug where the code looked like it would do one thing but would compile just fine and then do something else....

That was addressed in Python 3 over a decade ago. For example, I tried replacing eight spaces with a tab inside a function that is not executed during import:

Code: [Select]

~% python3 foo.py
  File "foo.py", line 136
    os.remove(path)
                  ^
TabError: inconsistent use of tabs and spaces in indentation

If you can mix tab and space indentation in Python 3 and it does not complain, report that: it is a bug.

If I can't indent code the way I want, I consider it a serious limitation.  Not being able to mix "whitespace" (which the most common definition of is space tab newline) as I wish makes me grumpy.

Mind you, there are languages where indentation is fixed for a good reason. The best example is JCL, which, if you go above a certain line length, considers next row a continuation of the long one, but that's because JCL assumes input is on punch cards, and once you hit column 71, you probably need to go on for a bit more, but the manilla is running out fast...

That, I'm certain, is the company Python hipsters seek.

[jfiresto]

... If I can't indent code the way I want, I consider it a serious limitation.  Not being able to mix "whitespace" (which the most common definition of is space tab newline) as I wish makes me grumpy....

I would agree with that, if you could somehow get the rest of the world to use tab stops exactly like yours, but alas they do not and some will not.

Python 2 and 3 have no problem with purely tab-indented code. Just playing with it now, Python 2 appears to have no trouble with mixed tab- and space-indentation – provided you use the one true tab width of exactly eight characters.

[PKTKS]

... If I can't indent code the way I want, I consider it a serious limitation.  Not being able to mix "whitespace" (which the most common definition of is space tab newline) as I wish makes me grumpy....

I would agree with that, if you could somehow get the rest of the world to use tab stops exactly like yours, but alas they do not and some will not.

Python 2 and 3 have no problem with purely tab-indented code. Just playing with it now, Python 2 appears to have no trouble with mixed tab- and space-indentation – provided you use the one true tab width of exactly eight characters.

This is just a comic nonsense joke...

WTF  would a programming language (a decent one)  care if I am using TAB or space or if my TAB has 8 4 or 1 char?

TAB is well defined ASCII table and never ever such stupid thing should exists in the first place..

Just nuts.

Paul

[mansaxel]

... If I can't indent code the way I want, I consider it a serious limitation.  Not being able to mix "whitespace" (which the most common definition of is space tab newline) as I wish makes me grumpy....

I would agree with that, if you could somehow get the rest of the world to use tab stops exactly like yours, but alas they do not and some will not.

Python 2 and 3 have no problem with purely tab-indented code. Just playing with it now, Python 2 appears to have no trouble with mixed tab- and space-indentation – provided you use the one true tab width of exactly eight characters.

The reason of using "whitespace" as definition is that indentation is done purely for readability reasons. (Or to prevent readability! That of course is not something desirable in production code; but the point stands.)
Formatting and structure are not to be mixed, simply because formatting is not to be trusted.

[Jan Audio]

Since long time they be pushing python language.
All those things i look they say : python is so much better, it is the best, i only use python.
Why all the pushing ?, no wonder it is so popular.
Snakey methods.

[PKTKS]

I will put that in another perspective...

**ALL**  sane  "IT pro grade"   tools can and usually do use a command line.

Obviously for the sake of automation scripting and pipeline tools.

e.g.  PERL can accept the script as a whole just:
   /usr/local/bin/perl -e 'while(this){dothat();othershit();blah();}' &2>$LOG >&1>device

the whole thing can be streamed pipelined and even dumped...

WTF spaces and identation would be any good there..?

All GNU tools (shells awk sed ed and others ..)  of course accept such simple principle..

but not that odd eccentric python...  obviously it is suited to Windooosee  mentality

They pushed that way too far..
and soon they will implode XWindows adn linux into  a subthing

Give me a break 

Paul

[jfiresto]

... Formatting and structure are not to be mixed, simply because formatting is not to be trusted.

Yes, but what if you could trust the formatting? Then you would have Python or something like it. I understand Python is not the first computer language to use format to define structure.

[tszaboo]

Since long time they be pushing python language.
All those things i look they say : python is so much better, it is the best, i only use python.
Why all the pushing ?, no wonder it is so popular.
Snakey methods.

Are we pushing?
Maybe we are just a bit enthusiastic about it. I know I was underwhelmed when I first tried it, I literally said, "Its like C but you dont have to end the line with ;". Had to learn if for the job, after really understanding it, it blew my mind. Probably that was around the time when I did my first machine learning project with it, that I never imagined doing otherwise.
And you know, people talk about good experiences. Nobody is pushing anyone. I just think people don't talk about their good times with Cobol, because they probably hanged themselves after reading someone else's code.

[Picuino]

https://wiki.python.org/moin/Powerful%20Python%20One-Liners

[Bassman59]

I refuse, given the choice, to use a programming language that imposes "structure" by "number of invisible characters". That is stupid on a level only challenged by "one type of invisible character is to be interpreted different than another invisible character".

Here are some hints on characters that without ambiguity can impose structure:

{} () ;

Apart from that fundamental stupidity, I'm sure Python is a nice language.

This is the primary reason I have no interest in even trying to use python.

I use Python for small scripts and such, but the thing that drives me bonkers about the language is that it lets you define a variable as one type and then a bit later in the same function you can redefine the same variable as another completely-different type.

[Picuino]

For the record, I recognize Python a multitude of advantages, without questioning the many disadvantages it can have. There is no perfect language for everything.

Ruby is a very similar language, but it has never had the popularity of Python. And, in my opinion, Ruby code is somewhat more difficult to maintain than Python code. That is a point that I consider important.

So the question seems to be, how has Python gotten the top spot in popularity with so many drawbacks?

[PKTKS]

For the record, I recognize Python a multitude of advantages, without questioning the many disadvantages it can have. There is no perfect language for everything.

Ruby is a very similar language, but it has never had the popularity of Python. And, in my opinion, Ruby code is somewhat more difficult to maintain than Python code. That is a point that I consider important.

So the question seems to be, how has Python gotten the top spot in popularity with so many drawbacks?

Easy to see..
and more or less said above...

It runs on windoozee pretty easy  - while PERL and RUBY are far more difficult to setup..

PERL being almost impossible to setup unless using "ActiveState" or CYGWIN..
UC windooze is not POSIX - they tried to "sell"  POSIX by 2000s and failed miserably... 
required insane values from what could be deployed using *NIX. Don't even got airborne the idea

Python is simple to learn for people without a clue in advanced programming.
Several "courses"  started to monetize this OO thingy Python has to make some cash..

Real world professional grade languages require a lot more time effort.. ( ASM /C/C++ PERL/AWK RUBY)
and   obviously  these do not run that easy (considering the extortive price of compilers ) on windoooze

Windooze is that.
BAD - COSTLY  - and pretty much a lack of  power grade mentality in soft and hardware + LICENSES
They just want money.  Whatever it takes.

All that can be solved by switching the platform and tools..
But it takes TIME EFFORT (a lot ) and MONEY..

Python is cheap newbie stuff
No compiler no POSIX complicated system setup and sys admins...

Vanilla POPCORN

Paul

[Picuino]

Python is used professionally in real world.
It is used in AI from Google to Amazon.
For representation and data management (Big data).
To create websites and services (Spotify, Netflix, Youtube, Reddit).
For scripting (it is one of the standard languages ​​in many Linux distributions).
In science with Jupyter Notebooks.
Etc.

Edit: For example this paper, Monitoring Scientific Python Usage on a Supercomputer

Abstract

Code: [Select]

—In 2021, more than 30% of users at the National Energy Research
Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) used Python on the Cori supercomputer.
To determine this we have developed and open-sourced a simple, minimally in-
vasive monitoring framework that leverages standard Python features to capture
Python imports and other job data via a package called "Customs". To analyze
the data we collect via Customs, we have developed a Jupyter-based analysis
framework designed to be interactive, shareable, extensible, and publishable via
a dashboard. Our stack includes Papermill to execute parameterized notebooks,
Dask-cuDF for multi-GPU processing, and Voila to render our notebooks as
web-based dashboards. We report preliminary findings from Customs data col-
lection and analysis. This work demonstrates that our monitoring framework can
capture insightful and actionable data including top Python libraries, preferred
user software stacks, and correlated libraries, leading to a better understanding
of user behavior and affording us opportunity to make increasingly data-driven
decisions regarding Python at NERSC

[blacksheeplogic]

Python found a niche very fast..
..even being a messy identated code piled together now there are are tons of usable stuff around..
every now fan boy put stuff together fast..

I think you will find the uptake of Python by the Universities had a lot to do with it gaining ground. Students for the most part push the crap they learn into the workplace when they arrive.

[SiliconWizard]

I use Python for small scripts and such,

If all you use it for are "small scripts", you may try something else. I personally use Lua.

but the thing that drives me bonkers about the language is that it lets you define a variable as one type and then a bit later in the same function you can redefine the same variable as another completely-different type.

That's what you get with dynamically-typed languages.
The problem with this is that it creates an opportunity for writing very bad code. Reusing the same variable for different purposes, in a statically-typed language, is already often seen as sloppy and undesirable, but if you can change its type on top of that, it's even worse. Of course people proponents will just tell you that while you can, you don't have to do it.

[SiliconWizard]

So the question seems to be, how has Python gotten the top spot in popularity with so many drawbacks?

That isn't a simple question to answer. How things become popular in general isn't: it's not all that predictable. That's been witnessed also with music, movie genres, fashion, and so on. Sure once a trend is there, many can piggy-back on it - while it lasts. But how it all started? There's no real magic recipe.

As I mentioned, I find interesting that there seems to be a parallel in how both Python and AI have become very popular in the last decade or so, and I'd venture that there are similar causes. And as a matter of fact, both are related as Python is used quite a bit in AI. And while this is not a *cause* per se, as I said, it's interesting how in both cases, proponents are just trying to push it very hard, trying to find more applications for the tools instead of trying to make/use tools fit for a purpose. There you have a typical marketing attitude, and not an engineering one. That's probably part of the answer. There surely was, and is, a need for a general-purpose interpreted language, and I admit most of them out there are nasty one way or another...

As I mentioned once, I doubt Python's author expected it to get so much traction when he designed the language. Python comes from the ABC language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABC_(programming_language) , designed earlier in the same institute. ABC, IMHO, was pretty horrible, and Python's syntax directly comes from it.

The idea behind significant whitespace, I guess, is that proper code formatting makes it more readable, and using "proper" formatting in a way such that improper formatting would mean broken code is certainly one way of enforcing it. Now this doesn't seem very practical (to say it gently) and is way too dangerous. Do you prefer some indentation mistake once in a while, making the code a bit less elegant, but still functional, or do you prefer the code to break in horrible ways in such a case? Yeah. Another issue is that indentation is, was, and will always be a "moving target". There are multiple ways of indenting code, which makes the Python approach even more horrible. So OK, the Python interpreter will try to spot indentation issues in your code - when they look likely bogus - but it can't be fail-safe.

[blacksheeplogic]

As I mentioned, I find interesting that there seems to be a parallel in how both Python and AI have become very popular in the last decade or so, and I'd venture that there are similar causes. And as a matter of fact, both are related as Python is used quite a bit in AI. And while this is not a *cause* per se, as I said, it's interesting how in both cases, proponents are just trying to push it very hard, trying to find more applications for the tools instead of trying to make/use tools fit for a purpose. There you have a typical marketing attitude, and not an engineering one. That's probably part of the answer. There surely was, and is, a need for a general-purpose interpreted language, and I admit most of them out there are nasty one way or another...

This maybe part of it, but having worked and trained both interns and new hires, their views and ways of getting something done is heavily biased by what they did/used as students. C/C++ is not being used and taught to the same extent as Python which the universities see as a 'easier' language to teach programming concepts with. I've spoken with tutors that say 'our students found C++ too difficult'. There is also a pervasive attitude that if course XXX uses it Course YYY will also.

As a side note, I found the conversation that students finding C++ difficult meant finding something easier very revealing but that's for another topic.

[mansaxel]

As a side note, I found the conversation that students finding C++ difficult meant finding something easier very revealing but that's for another topic.

I do not think that needs to be such an indicator of decay as it is made out to be. If you'd had the rich landscape of libraries and the sometimes near-magic of Python at hand when you started out, would you have used C?  Maybe as a personal challenge, but not else. Unless you had something that could not be made with Python.

Students will complain, and then they will learn, the hard things too. We are not getting dumber as a rule. We are mostly -- by circumstances -- allowed to get away with being what was seen as lazy.

And as for faculty "succumbing" -- is the goal a bootcamp destruction - rebuild style  "education" or is the goal to get people to actually learn something and grow?

[PKTKS]

This maybe part of it, but having worked and trained both interns and new hires, their views and ways of getting something done is heavily biased by what they did/used as students. C/C++ is not being used and taught to the same extent as Python which the universities see as a 'easier' language to teach programming concepts with. I've spoken with tutors that say 'our students found C++ too difficult'. There is also a pervasive attitude that if course XXX uses it Course YYY will also.

As a side note, I found the conversation that students finding C++ difficult meant finding something easier very revealing but that's for another topic.

It holds TRUE.

EASIER  translates to  CHEAP... very cheap you can put a python thing without compiler hassle into students and newbies heads...

EXPENDABLE..  all big corps  can fetch a huge asset base of newbies very cheap and expendable just doing shallow Python code thing..

Bottom line Python is CHEAP,  very affordable to expendable newbies..

Easy to monetize on Academia teaching  "pseudo-object-thing"  more or less just the shallow surface of serious programming..

No hassle with templates .. complicated pointer and memory allocation..
Easy money with expendable newbies..

I am waiting  the pile of money uncle Google spent on RUST to replace C into the kernel.

Paul

[nfmax]

Other things being equal, cheap is good! One big reason ADA 95 failed to make much of an impression in the wider industry was the lack of cheap compilers and IDEs.

In the case of Python, the availability of Numpy & Matplotlib, combined with the extortionate pricing of Matlab (and the lacklustre performance/compatibility of Scilab  & Octave), gave Python a big push in the field of number crunching. It's good enough, and cheap enough to become widely used, and because it's widely used, there are people around to suggest its use and help out when you get stuck. And so the snowball grows...

I have only recently started to need to use Python, and find it is Mostly Harmless. It has its own weirdnesses (why invent a whole new string-formatting scheme, FFS?), and of course the curse of Python 2/3 incompatibility (Python 2, just die already!). My favourite IDE (JetBrains) has a Python mode so I can work in a familiar environment, and it's good enough for what we are trying to achieve in the project. That's all that is needed - it doesn't have to be perfect!

[PKTKS]

mostly true as well..

But why re-invent the wheel using Python (for uses like numpy scipy) where PERL PDL and octave does 100x more already use proof?

PERL comes with BLAS and LAPACK bindings.. integrated in PDL command shell..

The initial step may be wider but the use of that weird Python scripts does not justify the hype on it.

Bottom line - nobody really needs Python.

It serves the gap CHEAP +EXPENDABLE - good to monetize for fast shallow purposes..

We still have to face serious use on the real scientific targets

Paul

[Just_another_Dave]

One of my major concerns about python (and in general about scripting languages) is how difficult is to distribute programs made with it. Not being able to generate an executable (or a similar package to a Java .jar) using just the official tools makes it hard for users without any knowledge about computers to install and run them.
Additionally, as it does not have a proper standard like C or Ada, its semantics change too fast leading to a significant amount of breaking changes between versions. As a result, you end up having to install different versions of python to be able to execute each program