5 ms·

In the article they mention a Python conference. I think Python is a good counter-example. It's an old language and still as strong as ever. On Stack Overflow,

In the article they mention a Python conference. I think Python is a good counter-example. It's an old language and still as strong as ever. On Stack Overflow, it recently passed JavaScript [1]. Unlike JavaScript, new Python code isn't all that different from old Python code. A lot of older Python candidates are being passed over for younger ones. Sure they might not be learning Rust, but there are younger python developers that are having an easier time getting a job, and they aren't necessarily learning Rust either. [1]: https://stackoverflow.blog/2017/09/06/incredible-growth-python/ https://stackoverflow.blog/2017/09/06/incredible-growth-pyth... https://insights.stackoverflow.com/trends?tags=python%2Cjavascript https://insights.stackoverflow.com/trends?tags=python%2Cjava...

Alex3917 8y ago
> It's an old language and still as strong as ever. Does it make sense to consider Python an old language if it's still a living language? The next version is coming out in October, and most new projects started today are running on versions released within the three years. This seems pretty different than something like COBOL, where it's technically still being developed but not in anywhere near the same way.
- benatkin 8y ago
  Not if being old has a negative connotation, or if being old implies that they have no new ideas, neither of which should be true, of technologies or of people.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  It's also worth noting that recent python versions have added tremendous quality of life improvements. If you haven't kept up with the language, then the code you're writing may still run, but it's not "pythonic" anymore.
  - caseymarquis 8y ago
    I haven't touched python in years. Can anyone link to a list of examples? I remember hearing about optional typing, which is always my favorite addition.
    - wiremine 8y ago
      Python is indeed getting better and better, but I personally wouldn't include optional typing... yet. Mostly because the optional typing in Python is just for tooling, not for the run compiler or run time [1]. Python is one of my go-to language, but I haven't found a compelling reason to use type hinting yet. Python's really good at binding C code [2], which is one of the reasons you see it in so many machine learning and scientific projects (Numpy, Scikit, Tenserflow, etc.) I think that's what given Python a lot of legs in the last few years. [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41356784/how-to-use-type-hints-in-python-3-6/41356872#41356872 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41356784/how-to-use-type... [2] https://stackoverflow.com/a/10202569 https://stackoverflow.com/a/10202569
- wiremine 8y ago
  > Does it make sense to consider Python an old language if it's still a living language? Python, I'd argue, is very much a living language. It was introduced in 1990, so it's 29 years old. Last release was 5 days ago as I write this [1] Java, is also a living language. It was introduced in 1995, so it's 23 years old. Last release was in September 25 [2] Cobol was introduced in 1959, so it's 1959. [3] The last table release was 2014 (which is a lot newer than I would have expected). Cobol is a great object lesson, I think, as the parent comment calls out. I don't think many software engineers would consider it a "modern" language, but according to the Wikipedia article, as of 2012, 60% of businesses use Cobol. So it's far from a "dead" language. Lisp was introduced in 1958... 61 years old. [4]. I don't think many developers would consider Lisp dead, either. Cobol's longevity seems to be tied to the fact that much of the legacy code encapsulates business logic, as opposed to UX logic (websites, mobile apps, etc.) There's more than a few lessons in there I think... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Python_(programming_language)&oldid=886838081 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Python_(programmi... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Java_(programming_language)&oldid=886248999 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Java_(programming... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COBOL&oldid=883241384 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COBOL&oldid=88324... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lisp_(programming_language)&oldid=886566242 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lisp_(programming...
  - kazinator 8y ago
    I consider the 1958 Lisp to be dead. The Lisp family's longevity doesn't stem from maintaining legacy code from 1960, but because it actually embodies attractive concepts that continue to captivate new generations of coders, often not in connection to anything mundane, like a job.
    - kazinator 8y ago
      Not ragging on Lisp here in any way, but it's been long since the original Lisp is has been viable. It continues to historic significance, and anything that calls itself Lisp still has cons, car, cdr, atom, lists ending in nil (which is a symbol) and such. In 1958, you had no macros, no lexical closures, no exception handling, no backquote, no objects or structures, no bignum integers, ... Whereas COBOL today is pretty much the same pile of stuff it was in 1960-something. It's not a vibrant language family with newer members. COBOL does not absorb new concepts. There are new, young people learning COBOL, but only in order to become maintainers of legacy systems: job security in banking, finance and government sectors. Maybe a few have a perverse curiosity: they want to know what is really behind the dirty five letter word. New people coming to a Lisp are coming for the Lisp itself. There aren't that many Lisp jobs involving new or legacy coding; new Lisp people learn and make new stuff from scratch. There is simply no comparison.
phkahler 8y ago
I'll be 50 soon and I've been dabbling in Rust. Not to improve my skills or any of that, but simply because my 40 years of coding experience tells me it really is awesome. I have some specialization the will be good for some time to come. When I read these ageism articles I just keep shaking my head. Last company I worked at had tons of them. You startup folks must live in a fucking bubble. (That was for effect, I love HN in case you oversensitive millenials can't tell)
- pdimitar 8y ago
  So did you experience ageism or not? I couldn't tell from your comment.
  - phkahler 8y ago
    No. Not even a little. My post was a bit unclear. One company I worked for has lots of older guys and it was clearly good for their products.

Alex3917 8y ago

> It's an old language and still as strong as ever. Does it make sense to consider Python an old language if it's still a living language? The next version is coming out in October, and most new projects started today are running on versions released within the three years. This seems pretty different than something like COBOL, where it's technically still being developed but not in anywhere near the same way.

benatkin 8y ago
Not if being old has a negative connotation, or if being old implies that they have no new ideas, neither of which should be true, of technologies or of people.
jniedrauer 8y ago
It's also worth noting that recent python versions have added tremendous quality of life improvements. If you haven't kept up with the language, then the code you're writing may still run, but it's not "pythonic" anymore.
- caseymarquis 8y ago
  I haven't touched python in years. Can anyone link to a list of examples? I remember hearing about optional typing, which is always my favorite addition.
  - wiremine 8y ago
    Python is indeed getting better and better, but I personally wouldn't include optional typing... yet. Mostly because the optional typing in Python is just for tooling, not for the run compiler or run time [1]. Python is one of my go-to language, but I haven't found a compelling reason to use type hinting yet. Python's really good at binding C code [2], which is one of the reasons you see it in so many machine learning and scientific projects (Numpy, Scikit, Tenserflow, etc.) I think that's what given Python a lot of legs in the last few years. [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41356784/how-to-use-type-hints-in-python-3-6/41356872#41356872 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41356784/how-to-use-type... [2] https://stackoverflow.com/a/10202569 https://stackoverflow.com/a/10202569
wiremine 8y ago
> Does it make sense to consider Python an old language if it's still a living language? Python, I'd argue, is very much a living language. It was introduced in 1990, so it's 29 years old. Last release was 5 days ago as I write this [1] Java, is also a living language. It was introduced in 1995, so it's 23 years old. Last release was in September 25 [2] Cobol was introduced in 1959, so it's 1959. [3] The last table release was 2014 (which is a lot newer than I would have expected). Cobol is a great object lesson, I think, as the parent comment calls out. I don't think many software engineers would consider it a "modern" language, but according to the Wikipedia article, as of 2012, 60% of businesses use Cobol. So it's far from a "dead" language. Lisp was introduced in 1958... 61 years old. [4]. I don't think many developers would consider Lisp dead, either. Cobol's longevity seems to be tied to the fact that much of the legacy code encapsulates business logic, as opposed to UX logic (websites, mobile apps, etc.) There's more than a few lessons in there I think... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Python_(programming_language)&oldid=886838081 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Python_(programmi... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Java_(programming_language)&oldid=886248999 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Java_(programming... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COBOL&oldid=883241384 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COBOL&oldid=88324... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lisp_(programming_language)&oldid=886566242 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lisp_(programming...
- kazinator 8y ago
  I consider the 1958 Lisp to be dead. The Lisp family's longevity doesn't stem from maintaining legacy code from 1960, but because it actually embodies attractive concepts that continue to captivate new generations of coders, often not in connection to anything mundane, like a job.
  - kazinator 8y ago
    Not ragging on Lisp here in any way, but it's been long since the original Lisp is has been viable. It continues to historic significance, and anything that calls itself Lisp still has cons, car, cdr, atom, lists ending in nil (which is a symbol) and such. In 1958, you had no macros, no lexical closures, no exception handling, no backquote, no objects or structures, no bignum integers, ... Whereas COBOL today is pretty much the same pile of stuff it was in 1960-something. It's not a vibrant language family with newer members. COBOL does not absorb new concepts. There are new, young people learning COBOL, but only in order to become maintainers of legacy systems: job security in banking, finance and government sectors. Maybe a few have a perverse curiosity: they want to know what is really behind the dirty five letter word. New people coming to a Lisp are coming for the Lisp itself. There aren't that many Lisp jobs involving new or legacy coding; new Lisp people learn and make new stuff from scratch. There is simply no comparison.

phkahler 8y ago

I'll be 50 soon and I've been dabbling in Rust. Not to improve my skills or any of that, but simply because my 40 years of coding experience tells me it really is awesome. I have some specialization the will be good for some time to come. When I read these ageism articles I just keep shaking my head. Last company I worked at had tons of them. You startup folks must live in a fucking bubble. (That was for effect, I love HN in case you oversensitive millenials can't tell)

pdimitar 8y ago
So did you experience ageism or not? I couldn't tell from your comment.
- phkahler 8y ago
  No. Not even a little. My post was a bit unclear. One company I worked for has lots of older guys and it was clearly good for their products.