3 ms·
Not sure about dwarfed. I'm at least 50x more productive at prototyping Python than in C. I don't understand what passion has to do with the language/library
by lqdc13 11y ago
Not sure about dwarfed. I'm at least 50x more productive at prototyping Python than in C.
I don't understand what passion has to do with the language/library choice.
Assuming there are some people who are primarily motivated by the language they use or syntax of that language, what about people who don't care about the language and are more interested in algorithms and data structures? What about people who are motivated by the final product?
Also, lack of such studies leads to people not trying new "stacks" because they are afraid that it's a new unproven technology that probably won't work.
- debaserab2 11y agoI don't think you "don't care" about the language - you just want a language that gets out of your way and allows you to express your solutions easily. That IS a language preference.
- nickpsecurity 11y agoYet, the poster works with a high-level language that readily offers common constructs that are needed without memory management, etc details. Integration is also easier than with C. So, there's concrete evidence that prototyping in Python will be faster given equal effort due to (a) enabling advantages and (b) less work for common stuff. That's me sticking to utter basics ignoring things like REPL interactive development.
- nostrademons 11y agoYou're at least 50x more productive at prototyping Python than in C. I am too. I know some veteran C++ programmers who are far more productive at prototyping in C++ than in Python, though. And even for myself (who is a huge fan of dynamic programming languages), there are some tasks - eg. MapReduces - where I'll prototype in C++ rather than Python because the integration with the framework and faster performance outweighs any gain from language constructs.