Products > Programming
Python becomes the most popular language
Karel:
--- Quote from: bd139 on May 18, 2022, 06:22:50 am ---
--- Quote from: PKTKS on May 17, 2022, 12:35:14 pm ---
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 12, 2022, 09:12:05 pm ---
--- Quote ---Personally, I think that even if there's tons of 'bad' code written in Python, it's a much better situation than if that same code were all in 'good' assembly (ignoring that that's totally impractical, in real terms), because it's very unlikely that Python code is going to do something dangerous, most likely it will just be inefficient, which is not really a big deal.
--- End quote ---
Well, I agree it's better but for a different reason - the state of the art progresses much faster if you have more shoulders to stand on, even if they aren't the strongest. Often, just knowing something can be done allows you to do it better, whereas previously it may never have occurred to try.
--- End quote ---
it just happens that the real de facto good code in what matters... most...
(Scientific apps, Numeric algos, fully tested and decades reviewed libs.. )
they are already written, fully stressed tested, and optimized and ported...
It just happens they are written in C and FORTRAN mostly. Several reasons
All reasons boils down to a very steady RATIONALE.
Nobody needs to re-write them. Unless obviously these newbies...
It would take a decade to acquaint these several decades tools..
it seems cheap easy to jump start to Pythonish... look ma I can code Python
Paul
--- End quote ---
I’m regularly finding bus sized holes in off the shelf C.
In fact I’m responsible for a couple of mid level CVEs :-DD
Stuff does need to be rewritten.
--- End quote ---
Rewritten means new bugs and new security issues.
It's my impression that programmers are not getting smarter, on the contrary...
It's astonishing to see that, today, programmers don't check input and assume many things.
Also because their bosses don't give them the time to carefully think and test.
PlainName:
--- Quote ---In fact I’m responsible for a couple of mid level CVEs
--- End quote ---
I'm sure you didn't mean it the way it sounds! :-DD
nfmax:
Knowing @bd139 by repute, I wouldn’t be surprised if he did!
bd139:
That was intentional and can be interpreted both ways simultaneously :popcorn:
Vtile:
--- Quote from: nctnico on April 21, 2022, 11:27:21 pm ---
--- Quote from: Cerebus on April 19, 2022, 01:04:09 pm ---
--- Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on April 19, 2022, 04:31:33 am ---
--- Quote from: brucehoult on April 19, 2022, 03:10:52 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 18, 2022, 09:51:05 pm ---As a general thought regarding programming languages, and not specific to Python (although it definitely is concerned), I have a problem with languages that are tightly coupled with their implementation. This is wrong on many levels.
--- End quote ---
Yes, this is annoying, especially when they feel free to make seriously incompatible changes between versions so that old programs don't work on new versions.
--- End quote ---
This.
Even if there is a use_version_x param or whatever, nobody seems to use it. And then to build a interpreter that -could- deal with it at worst with a noisy warning but instead fatal errors out. :palm:
It's as though they resurrected all the worst bits of winword *.doc obsolete versioning, DLL hell and syntax stupidity like it's some kind of competition or homage to MS. If the next version of Python shows up with a floating paper clip, I'm gunna do backflips.
--- End quote ---
To be fair to Python, this business of producing a new version of the programming language itself every few weeks/months/each-year is not a Python exclusive "feature". Most of the new kid on the block programming languages do this, and to my mind it is an insane way to go about producing tools. Would anyone produce mechanical tools that had a new version every few months which required you to use, say, a version 4.3 screwdriver to insert/remove a version 4.3 screw? No one would try to do this with actual physical tools to a bunch of burly hammer wielding men for fear of serious bodily damage.
Moreover, the practice leads to a sense that everything is ephemeral, everything is in beta, nothing is built to last, nothing has passed the test of time, so why should you bother to produce anything stable, long lived and itself capable of passing the test of time with these tools?
--- End quote ---
Where it comes to Python, I have to agree with this. Over the years I have tried to install some Python based software but ran into many incompatibilities between versions and OS. Initially I had the impression that Python was easely portable and maintainable but the opposite is true. It is even worse compared to the DLL hell that plagued the older Windows versions. IMHO it is better to write an application in C++ using Qt or WxWidgets and link it statically to have a fighting chance of being able to install & run an application next year compared to using Python.
If you want to distribute a Python application, you have to hand-out pre-configured VM images.
Bottom line: Python is great to tinker a script together but it absolutely sucks for writing applications (unless you want to keep sinking money into software that is essentially finished).
--- End quote ---
It was so nice to find a program backthen written with delphi, that just did run without any dll frameworks nor heavy installers .. most of the time they still run as back then.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version