4 ms·

> What??? 4 and 5 are legit complaints, the rest is literally the nittiest of picks, in my opinion. I'd argue that 4) (async support) is the only meaningful po

by nuerow 5y ago

> What??? 4 and 5 are legit complaints, the rest is literally the nittiest of picks, in my opinion. I'd argue that 4) (async support) is the only meaningful point and 5) , given it's a Python framework, is at most a nice-to-have. But yes, this article is a complete waste of a click.

paganel 5y ago
> I'd argue that 4) (async support) is the only meaningful point and 5) , given it's a Python framework, is at most a nice-to-have. Same thing here, and I've been writing Django code for a living for 15 years now. What baffled me was the complaint about the admin interface, if used right can get a small business up and running almost instantly.
ledauphin 5y ago
I'd recommend giving a bit more weight to the experiences of other developers. Static typing in Python has become fairly widespread and even idiomatic in some circles, even if you haven't experienced that yet.
- nuerow 5y ago
  > I'd recommend giving a bit more weight to the experiences of other developers. Static typing in Python has become fairly widespread and even idiomatic in some circles, even if you haven't experienced that yet. You should really refrain from filling in the void in your understanding or knowledge of anyone else's experience with output from your imagination. Also, I'm not sure you noticed the absurdity of trying to sell Python's type hints as being "idiomatic in some circles" when you're discussing a specific circle of Python which is renowned for not using type hints at all.
  - ledauphin 5y ago
    I took the point of the article to be that Django is making no effort to enter the now fairly idiomatic world of static type checking in Python? I guess we could reasonably debate about the meaning of "nice-to-have", but for some people including me, I would find working with a framework that thwarted my efforts to statically type my code to be more than just "not nice" - I would actively avoid it. Which, again, I believe gets at the heart of the article. There are plenty of folks who will choose not to use Django precisely because it seems not to be evolving alongside the language.

by nuerow 5y ago

paganel 5y ago

> I'd argue that 4) (async support) is the only meaningful point and 5) , given it's a Python framework, is at most a nice-to-have. Same thing here, and I've been writing Django code for a living for 15 years now. What baffled me was the complaint about the admin interface, if used right can get a small business up and running almost instantly.

ledauphin 5y ago

I'd recommend giving a bit more weight to the experiences of other developers. Static typing in Python has become fairly widespread and even idiomatic in some circles, even if you haven't experienced that yet.

nuerow 5y ago
> I'd recommend giving a bit more weight to the experiences of other developers. Static typing in Python has become fairly widespread and even idiomatic in some circles, even if you haven't experienced that yet. You should really refrain from filling in the void in your understanding or knowledge of anyone else's experience with output from your imagination. Also, I'm not sure you noticed the absurdity of trying to sell Python's type hints as being "idiomatic in some circles" when you're discussing a specific circle of Python which is renowned for not using type hints at all.
- ledauphin 5y ago
  I took the point of the article to be that Django is making no effort to enter the now fairly idiomatic world of static type checking in Python? I guess we could reasonably debate about the meaning of "nice-to-have", but for some people including me, I would find working with a framework that thwarted my efforts to statically type my code to be more than just "not nice" - I would actively avoid it. Which, again, I believe gets at the heart of the article. There are plenty of folks who will choose not to use Django precisely because it seems not to be evolving alongside the language.