Therefore, I agree with explicit typing, and I find "easy" languages with automatic typing more difficult to use. I did struggle with PHP typing after having some years of limited experience in C++ and C, even though the automatic type system was supposedly "easier".
I would like to see even more explicit control and writing down assumptions in formal ways; for example, add ranges to variables in C (pretty much like Ada/VHDL does).
type ASCII_digit = 48..57;
var digit_char: array[ASCII_digit] of char;
In this paper, we first present an analysis and comparison of
the energy efficiency of 27 well-known software languages
from the popular software repository The Computer Lan-
guage Benchmarks Game. We are able to show which were the
most energy efficient software languages, execution types,
and paradigms across 10 different benchmark problems.
It's easy to become a script kiddy, but hard to become a software developer.
Expression is just a pretty wrapper - the content matters! That study doesn't reveal anything new, it simply confirms old programming basics. Anything interpreted is fine for tasks rarely performed but sucks when run all the time. One can ignore the greybeards but no new and fancy programming language will change that. Instead of improving programming some 'geniuses' create another new language which is meant to change things, but actually it doesn't. It's just another new language. Better learn to deal with memory management and security than wasting resources on yet another fancy language. It's easy to become a script kiddy, but hard to become a software developer.
Its main competitors are Python (currently number 1) and Julia (moving from position 32 to position 26 this month).
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.
Programming IS HARD. You only get out of something what you're willing to put into it. ASM is hard, C is hard, but they run SOOOOOOOOO fast, and having huge amounts of RAM and multiple cores and fast disks is NOT a good reason to be lazy.
computing is getting more frustrating with more and more lazy dudes hanging around
those lazy dudes creating stuff by just snapping together lots of other stuff show that things can work, and when you get to use them they are useful (if still not necessarily sensible). Just knowing something can be done often allows it to be done 'properly' and better.
Tiobe April headline.
Python replacing Matlab?
"April Headline: MATLAB about to drop out of the top 20
Good old MATLAB is about to drop out of the top 20 for the first time in more than 10 years. The MATLAB programming language is mainly used in the numerical analysis domain. It is often combined with Simulink models, which are from the same MathWorks company. Although MATLAB has a biannual release cycle, the language doesn't evolve that much. And since MATLAB licenses are rather expensive, alternatives are catching up quickly now. Its main competitors are Python (currently number 1) and Julia (moving from position 32 to position 26 this month). --Paul Jansen CEO TIOBE Software "
Executive summary: Python is the Windows of programming languages.
Its main competitors are Python (currently number 1) and Julia (moving from position 32 to position 26 this month).
And R, Shirley?
Meanwhile, Python is not too slow when most of the work is done by compiled libraries like NumPy. I know several physicists that can program in C but choose to code simulations in Python. They use large math libraries, some of which are available for both C and Python. They report that the Python code runs almost as fast as C code, but requires much less of their time to write. I'm in no position to tell them they should be programming in asm.
I do know one guy that insists on writing his own pixel level image processing code in C, but he's too old to learn anything new.
I do know one guy that insists on writing his own pixel level image processing code in C, but he's too old to learn anything new.Hey! So do I! On microcontrollers, that is, interfacing to small ILI9341 and similar display modules. It's fun. Reminds me of the early nineties, creating all sorts of pixel effects...
No, he's sure his hand coded C routines are faster.
As long as everyone is having fun.
Executive summary: Python is the Windows of programming languages.Perhaps this is true in terms of popularity.
But it is definitely not true in terms of licensing. Python is free and open-source.
The whole "FOSS" baloney is meaningless, people parrot it like it's magic sauce.
I'd rather pay for a product that WORKS, than have a "community" (hah!) of freetards that shrug and say " It's free, you're free to fix it and modify the source code" - yeuccch. I'd rather a CLOSED system that is working because the company behind it are motivated to fix it due to it being a paid product, company image, shareholders etc. Money is a GIGANTIC motivator.