3 ms·
It's quite funny how you and some others here are saying python got into it's place by pure luck and being installed by default on linux systems. Then you turn
by cycomanic 4y ago
It's quite funny how you and some others here are saying python got into it's place by pure luck and being installed by default on linux systems.
Then you turn around and mention Ruby. I recall that there was a lot of hype around it for quite a while, largely due to Ruby on Rails (certainly outhyping Python), and it's popularity in terms of usage was very similar to Python. However, that did not last, so why is that? Are you saying Python "hyping" and default installation only happened after ~2011 (where Ruby really started to decline compared to Python)?
I would argue the success of Python is largely due to people building some packages like numpy and scipy in Python, because they sort it was the best tool for the job. Then came the ML wave and Python due to that ecosystem was ideally placed as a language that was easy to use for ML researchers. That you mention C++ even in that comparison shows that you do not understand why people use Python. I can tell you if I had to get my graduate students to use C++ for their analysis and lab automation tasks, we'd still be graphing by hand.
- qsort 4y agoLuck no, path-dependency yes. Numpy is fantastic and so is scipy, but there's no inherent reason why they couldn't have been "numruby" or "numlua". With that said, I agree with you that your parent's thesis isn't really operative, Python and Ruby are almost exactly the same technology, therefore the decision on which one to use depends on the available ecosystem. Everything else is effectively rounding error.