3 ms·

As a C programmer who "tried" Python, I feel offended. I wrote substantial OO code using list comperhensions and other things pythonic. I am also a functional p

As a C programmer who "tried" Python, I feel offended. I wrote substantial OO code using list comperhensions and other things pythonic. I am also a functional programming affectionado, though a realist, not a fan. Don't label people. Speak against companies mismanaging people by driving them to write low quality code. Be open and promote useful programming concepts and tools. P.S. Long live static typing. Down with EcmaScript.

orf 11y ago
I'm sorry you feel offended but my comment was not labelling anyone, merely stating surprise that a company I did not know used Python produced a large, idiomatic Python project seemingly out of the blue. Similar projects at other companies might have produced huge OOP classes with LotsOfCamelCase, c-style for loops and other such constructs. Kudos to them and the author. > Speak against companies mismanaging people by driving them to write low quality code I don't think that's relevant to my comment, but I would say that it's not some company overlord making people churn out non-idomatic Python code.
baq 11y ago
when you write C, you should be writing elegant C. when you write Python, you should be writing elegant Python. trying to code Python in C is about as ugly as trying to code C in Python and both should be discouraged equally. the thing i don't understand is what you took offense at.
- paxcoder 11y ago
  Swap the languages around and see if the statement doesn't sound a bit elitist to you. I feel like the parent could have chosen more neutral words if they wanted to. Their particular experience with irreverent/careless programmers just rubbed against my experience with technology fans I guess (the word fans used in the same sense as in my previous comment).
  - scott_karana 11y ago
    Swapping the languages fits exactly consistently with what GP said. Trying to use first-class functions and OO paradigms in C is going to bite you in the ass, hard. Just as iterative pointer manipulations in Python aren't preferable. Both languages have different "styles" that suit their purposes excellently, but mixing them improperly in either direction will be painful.
  - baltoo 11y ago
    DH2. Responding to Tone.

orf 11y ago

I'm sorry you feel offended but my comment was not labelling anyone, merely stating surprise that a company I did not know used Python produced a large, idiomatic Python project seemingly out of the blue. Similar projects at other companies might have produced huge OOP classes with LotsOfCamelCase, c-style for loops and other such constructs. Kudos to them and the author. > Speak against companies mismanaging people by driving them to write low quality code I don't think that's relevant to my comment, but I would say that it's not some company overlord making people churn out non-idomatic Python code.

baq 11y ago

when you write C, you should be writing elegant C. when you write Python, you should be writing elegant Python. trying to code Python in C is about as ugly as trying to code C in Python and both should be discouraged equally. the thing i don't understand is what you took offense at.

paxcoder 11y ago
Swap the languages around and see if the statement doesn't sound a bit elitist to you. I feel like the parent could have chosen more neutral words if they wanted to. Their particular experience with irreverent/careless programmers just rubbed against my experience with technology fans I guess (the word fans used in the same sense as in my previous comment).
- scott_karana 11y ago
  Swapping the languages fits exactly consistently with what GP said. Trying to use first-class functions and OO paradigms in C is going to bite you in the ass, hard. Just as iterative pointer manipulations in Python aren't preferable. Both languages have different "styles" that suit their purposes excellently, but mixing them improperly in either direction will be painful.
- baltoo 11y ago
  DH2. Responding to Tone.