5 ms·
It seems like the basis for your comment is weird stack tribalism that you’ve very evidently bought into, rather than anything actually…worth discussing. It th
by KyeRussell 4y ago
It seems like the basis for your comment is weird stack tribalism that you’ve very evidently bought into, rather than anything actually…worth discussing.
It then comes as no surprise that throughout your entire comment you didn’t seem willing you yield any ground to Python or Django at all.
It then comes as no surprise that your assertions about Django are counter to my experience, as someone that by the sound of things has worked with Django a lot more than you have.
I have only worked on one production Django project that *didn’t^ use Django’s auth system. And the fact that you call Django’s generic class-based views “scaffolding” - a term that I seldom hear in Django spaces but hear all the time in Rails spaces - further speaks to your lack of familiarly. Most production Django projects I’ve worked on have made extensive use of either these generic class-based views or the Django REST Framework analogues, which - whilst not part of core Django - still speak to the usefulness of the pattern.
It honestly sounds like your experience with Django - if any - has been treating it like Rails. Which - honestly - is mostly fine. In my eyes, the frameworks are comparable in…most ways. But your assertion that these batteries are thrown away in production contexts is just wrong. Unless you want to tell me that I’ve spent ~a decade earning a living working with Django and somehow not managed to do any “real” work, perhaps consider the global applicability of your personal experience.
It’s really disappointing to see the re-uprising of Ruby (and Elixir) developers positioning themselves as the enlightened elite against the hoards of plebeian Python developers. I without a doubt include your comment in this critique. I understand that given Elixir’s increased FP focus that the community can’t avoid FP elitism. Doing it for Ruby though? It’s just cringey. I’ve got no beef with Ruby, Rails, or the development communities of either, except for the fact that people are feeling the need to pick up this ridiculous turf war.
Given that Python is my daily driver, Python spaces are where I’m usually active in. Ruby is seldom mentioned. Whenever I go to a Python-related HN thread, I don’t have to scroll far to see some Ruby developer making some thinly veiled assertions that Python developers are un enlightened idiots. If I look at a Ruby thread, there’s always someone salty about not being able to get the Python drones on their team to use the One True Language. It feels like I’ve gone back in time 15 years.
- josevalim 4y agoIt is perhaps utopia but it would be nice if we could discuss those topics without falling into camps. For example, I could argue for hours about the benefits of immutability, but I still believe that imperative loops are clearer than functional ones. There is even a repository with solutions for nested traversals in different languages and the Python one is my preferred by some margin: https://github.com/josevalim/nested-map-reduce-traversal https://github.com/josevalim/nested-map-reduce-traversal
- out_of_protocol 4y agoIf only functional languages with immutable variables had some kind of "unsafe" section where you could actually mutate stuff... Rust approach looks good btw, with "let" making immutable vars and longer "let mut" for mutable variables
- josevalim 4y agoFWIW, F# also has something similar to `let mut`.
- nickjj 4y agoJose, are there still plans to modify Elixir at the language level to be potentially closer to the Python implementation? I know you started a proposal once around the time when we made that repo.
- josevalim 4y agoI was not able to write a proposal that was generally accepted by the community. We are still one break-through away from that happening.