3 ms·

Where's your proof that a mix of e.g Python and C is a particularly productive way of working? This is not the first time you make this unsubstantiated claim.

by blub 11y ago

Where's your proof that a mix of e.g Python and C is a particularly productive way of working? This is not the first time you make this unsubstantiated claim. The opposite of what you say is easy to argue for: two languages, twice the headaches. * first of all, you need to know TWO different languages. C is completely different from a language like Ruby or Lisp. * even if you manage to do that, you still have two build systems, two things to package and deploy, you need two libraries of everything (e.g: unit testing) * you need to constantly pass information between the two worlds, which can be both performance costly and challenging from a design perspective. * normally it's not as easy as "rewriting the slow parts in C". What if your problem is overall memory usage? What if there is no one function to rewrite? * if you make a mistake in C (super easy), your whole app crashes. I don't think this is the magical solution you're presenting it to be at all.

fizixer 11y ago
Here are some examples (based on my limited experience) that hardly anyone could challenge: - Unix philosophy and the shell utilities (bash + C) - Emacs (lisp + C) - Python scientific stack (Python + C/FORTRAN) (Heck even Google had to offer tensorflow in two interfaces, Python and C++. If they were going to offer a Python interface anyway, they could make their life 100x easier by implementing the backend in C instead of C++). - git (bash + C) As for 2 languages, twice the headaches, not if your 1 language is a multi-paradigm monster called C++. I'm not really sure if this used to be the mainstream advice when C++ was created but these days it's common knowledge that you should learn at least 3 to 5 different languages in order to improve your programming languages. If you can learn 3 to 5 languages, you can definitely work in 2 languages for your projects. And by 'average joe' I don't mean any disrespect to C++ programmers. (I'm just commenting on the thinking behind the creation of C++). Quite the contrary, I have no doubt that it takes a lot more skills and hard work to program in C++ idiomatically than in C. Unfortunately, IMO, a lot of that skill and hard work is spent managing with the "accidental complexity" of the language, and not the "inherent complexity" of the project.

by blub 11y ago

fizixer 11y ago

Here are some examples (based on my limited experience) that hardly anyone could challenge: - Unix philosophy and the shell utilities (bash + C) - Emacs (lisp + C) - Python scientific stack (Python + C/FORTRAN) (Heck even Google had to offer tensorflow in two interfaces, Python and C++. If they were going to offer a Python interface anyway, they could make their life 100x easier by implementing the backend in C instead of C++). - git (bash + C) As for 2 languages, twice the headaches, not if your 1 language is a multi-paradigm monster called C++. I'm not really sure if this used to be the mainstream advice when C++ was created but these days it's common knowledge that you should learn at least 3 to 5 different languages in order to improve your programming languages. If you can learn 3 to 5 languages, you can definitely work in 2 languages for your projects. And by 'average joe' I don't mean any disrespect to C++ programmers. (I'm just commenting on the thinking behind the creation of C++). Quite the contrary, I have no doubt that it takes a lot more skills and hard work to program in C++ idiomatically than in C. Unfortunately, IMO, a lot of that skill and hard work is spent managing with the "accidental complexity" of the language, and not the "inherent complexity" of the project.