3 ms·

> When IBM stops supporting some technology, you can be certain that it is absolutely commercially dead. RIP. IBM got out of the laptop business almost 20 year

by geocar 5y ago

> When IBM stops supporting some technology, you can be certain that it is absolutely commercially dead. RIP. IBM got out of the laptop business almost 20 years ago. > The down-side is that programs are generally hard to understand by outsiders I think there are a lot of people who believe they understand Python because it kindof looks like Java. I wonder if they leave their shoes tied overnight or if they check a tutorial on YouTube every morning. > It is the main reason that Kenneth Iverson received the Turing award. Array programming is probably the most interesting piece of technology I have seen in over thirty years of programming. If you can’t read it, it’s like saying you can’t lift. No of course you can’t lift unless pull you lift. That’s how it works. The good news is it’s easier than you think.

chipotle_coyote 5y ago
> I think there are a lot of people who believe they understand Python because it kindof looks like Java. Have you actually met anyone who's asserted that Python "kind of looks like Java", let alone that its resemblance to Java makes it easier for them to understand? I've written both Java and Python, and out of all the things I could imagine saying about Python, "Boy, this is sure kind of like Java" would be very, very far down on the list.
- geocar 5y ago
  > > I think there are a lot of people who believe they understand Python because it kindof looks like Java. > Have you actually met anyone who's asserted that Python "kind of looks like Java" That's unfair. > let alone that its resemblance to Java makes it easier for them to understand? Yes, but maybe not in the way you're expecting. Guido himself remarked on many of their similarities back in 1997[1]; They definitely have a very similar execution model, the syntax can be directly translated almost like a cheat-sheet[2], and yeah, I think people can easily convince themselves into thinking the knowledge -- even superficial knowledge like the aesthetics of one language can help them "comprehend" the other. If you haven't observed this, I think you either haven't been programming that long or you're just trying to look at what I'm saying too narrowly in an effort to troll for a fight. And it's not just Python: Norvig even (reportedly) almost convinced himself (in this way) that Python is the same as Lisp[3], and that's just bananas! Now, if you still don't know what I'm talking about, this next thing isn't going to make any sense at all either, but I'm hopeful you can try to understand after some reflection, and if not you, someone else who reads this with an open mind: If you are using one language to understand another, you're not actually understanding that language. That has a very significant implication that turns out to make Array programming really hard for experienced programmers: Because you already know Java when you learn Python (for example) you think you're learning Python faster than you actually are. It still takes a few years to get really good at Python, but in the meantime, you can lean so heavily on your Java-think you don't even realise it. You've benchmarked the rate at which you "learn", and you just can't get APL, so you might just say something impossibly stupid like "APL is hard to understand" when Iverson won a freakin' Turing award for how understandable it was[4]! Maybe that helps you understand what I mean, but if not, maybe this[5] will. [1]: https://www.python.org/doc/essays/comparisons/ https://www.python.org/doc/essays/comparisons/ [2]: http://math-cs.gordon.edu/courses/cps122/handouts-2014/From%20Python%20to%20Java%20Lecture/A%20Comparison%20of%20the%20Syntax%20of%20Python%20and%20Java.pdf http://math-cs.gordon.edu/courses/cps122/handouts-2014/From%... [3]: http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/2008/02/ooh-ooh-my-turn-why-lisp.html http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/2008/02/ooh-ooh-my-turn-wh.... [4]: https://www.jsoftware.com/papers/tot.htm https://www.jsoftware.com/papers/tot.htm [5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cBtqhq5P28 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cBtqhq5P28
  - hibbelig 5y ago
    Thank you for these explanations. I reflected on my experience. My intuitive reaction to APL is that all these special symbols aren’t necessary and APL would be more approachable with some speaking identifiers instead. Then I remembered my experience with Perl. People used to say that all these special characters make Perl hard to learn. And I couldn’t understand what the problem was. Now I see my hypocrisy!
- oofoe 5y ago
  I have certainly met people who have done their level best to write Python that /looked/ like Java... But even they were disappointed at how un-Java Python was. I'm sure Guido is relieved.

by geocar 5y ago

chipotle_coyote 5y ago

> I think there are a lot of people who believe they understand Python because it kindof looks like Java. Have you actually met anyone who's asserted that Python "kind of looks like Java", let alone that its resemblance to Java makes it easier for them to understand? I've written both Java and Python, and out of all the things I could imagine saying about Python, "Boy, this is sure kind of like Java" would be very, very far down on the list.

geocar 5y ago
> > I think there are a lot of people who believe they understand Python because it kindof looks like Java. > Have you actually met anyone who's asserted that Python "kind of looks like Java" That's unfair. > let alone that its resemblance to Java makes it easier for them to understand? Yes, but maybe not in the way you're expecting. Guido himself remarked on many of their similarities back in 1997[1]; They definitely have a very similar execution model, the syntax can be directly translated almost like a cheat-sheet[2], and yeah, I think people can easily convince themselves into thinking the knowledge -- even superficial knowledge like the aesthetics of one language can help them "comprehend" the other. If you haven't observed this, I think you either haven't been programming that long or you're just trying to look at what I'm saying too narrowly in an effort to troll for a fight. And it's not just Python: Norvig even (reportedly) almost convinced himself (in this way) that Python is the same as Lisp[3], and that's just bananas! Now, if you still don't know what I'm talking about, this next thing isn't going to make any sense at all either, but I'm hopeful you can try to understand after some reflection, and if not you, someone else who reads this with an open mind: If you are using one language to understand another, you're not actually understanding that language. That has a very significant implication that turns out to make Array programming really hard for experienced programmers: Because you already know Java when you learn Python (for example) you think you're learning Python faster than you actually are. It still takes a few years to get really good at Python, but in the meantime, you can lean so heavily on your Java-think you don't even realise it. You've benchmarked the rate at which you "learn", and you just can't get APL, so you might just say something impossibly stupid like "APL is hard to understand" when Iverson won a freakin' Turing award for how understandable it was[4]! Maybe that helps you understand what I mean, but if not, maybe this[5] will. [1]: https://www.python.org/doc/essays/comparisons/ https://www.python.org/doc/essays/comparisons/ [2]: http://math-cs.gordon.edu/courses/cps122/handouts-2014/From%20Python%20to%20Java%20Lecture/A%20Comparison%20of%20the%20Syntax%20of%20Python%20and%20Java.pdf http://math-cs.gordon.edu/courses/cps122/handouts-2014/From%... [3]: http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/2008/02/ooh-ooh-my-turn-why-lisp.html http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/2008/02/ooh-ooh-my-turn-wh.... [4]: https://www.jsoftware.com/papers/tot.htm https://www.jsoftware.com/papers/tot.htm [5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cBtqhq5P28 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cBtqhq5P28
- hibbelig 5y ago
  Thank you for these explanations. I reflected on my experience. My intuitive reaction to APL is that all these special symbols aren’t necessary and APL would be more approachable with some speaking identifiers instead. Then I remembered my experience with Perl. People used to say that all these special characters make Perl hard to learn. And I couldn’t understand what the problem was. Now I see my hypocrisy!
oofoe 5y ago
I have certainly met people who have done their level best to write Python that /looked/ like Java... But even they were disappointed at how un-Java Python was. I'm sure Guido is relieved.