3 ms·
While an unpopular opinion, I believe Python has lost its way too. "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." - yeah I don't see it
by numerlo 9y ago
While an unpopular opinion, I believe Python has lost its way too. "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." - yeah I don't see it and that used to be one of the reasons I loved Python. They used to at least try for that to hold true, not it's like they try for the opposite. I much prefer Go these days.
- goatlover 9y agoI understand preferring Go for static typing or performance, but not because a dynamic language gives you more than one way to do things. If don't like that Python has gained too many features, why not use something like Lua? Why jump into a more restricted language that's going to require you to write more code? I get the argument if a programmer doesn't like dynamic languages in general, but not because one dynamic language has become too flexible.
- woah 9y agoI looked at Lua briefly instead of Go, but it looks like the concurrency story is lacking. Go also has an enormous standard library which helps for quick tasks.
- mixmastamyk 9y agoGo will probably be a mess in 20 years as well.
- poooogles 9y agoYet still no generics. Python even has limited generics now through mypy and pep 484.
- stefantalpalaru 9y ago> Yet still no generics. You can use the gccgo runtime from Nim and get your goroutines and channels working with generics, macros and everything else Nim has to offer: https://github.com/stefantalpalaru/golib-nim https://github.com/stefantalpalaru/golib-nim