4 ms·
> But SQLAlchemy is definitely not "better". It is more powerful, more correct, more proper, more flexible. Indeed - for my purposes, it's better. But I loves
by ris 9y ago
> But SQLAlchemy is definitely not "better". It is more powerful, more correct, more proper, more flexible.
Indeed - for my purposes, it's better. But I loves me' databases.
> And Python, which is "who cares purity, it lets me get shit done fast and easy."
Oh - ouch. It is possible to write quite pure python, y'know. But it allows you to break the rules when purity would just lead you down very obtuse paths. Or when your code is fundamentally side-effecty.
- maweki 9y agoIt is not practical to write pure python code. There's always the implicit state of a generator so lazyness is fucked. And you don't know whether you're passed a list or a generator and then you tuple-unpack it and the generator is empty. And then, of course, you can override the dot-operator and even bare statements can have side effects. Have you ever tried to write really _pure_ python? I did and it is harder than it needs to be.