3 ms·
In my experience it's the opposite. The creation of more and more complicated code led to more complicated languages, not the other way around. Some stuff is j
by tdb7893 9y ago
In my experience it's the opposite. The creation of more and more complicated code led to more complicated languages, not the other way around. Some stuff is just going to be complicated regardless of language and if you use a less complicated language like C it sometimes makes the resulting code more complicated as you have to spend time essentially duplicating language features that already exist in the more complicated languages
- Meai 9y agoI didn't mean to imply that C has enough features, it definitely should have a few more. But that should be it, don't keep adding stuff just because it's 'nice' to have. The added cost of maintaining big codebases of a language that has many features compounds a lot.
- ams6110 9y agoIt's been a long time since I coded in C but I can't imagine there aren't solid, battle-tested libraries for handling strings, collections, and all the other nice things that Python gives you. Am I wrong?
- cwyers 9y agoSure. Now let's say that you're using one library using String Library A, one library using String Library B... go forth and convert strings at every point in your application where you use one library or the other. There's benefits to having things included in a language in an opinionated way -- everyone using that language does it that way.