5 ms·

This reply strongly reads of 'im smarter than eveyone' and 'know everything.' Is it possible that the author is doing something that you don't know about? Such

This reply strongly reads of 'im smarter than eveyone' and 'know everything.' Is it possible that the author is doing something that you don't know about? Such as writing and reading text to sockets (which would be I/O.) And is it possible they may have a reason to be using asyncio in Python (which uses a single main thread and hence needs something like asyncio for concurrency.) >Needless to say that the whole benchmark is worthless Overhead startup isn't worthless. 'I mean, I know, in Pythonland this is just your average Wednesday' and here we go. The whole post was really just you trying to make out that you're superior to everyone else. In this case looking down on an entire ecosystem. Why? Python is one of the most popular languages. It has an elegant syntax and it's capable of solving most problems. Go jerk yourself off in private.

crabbone 4y ago
> This reply strongly reads of 'im smarter than eveyone' Dude, where's everyone, where? I'm smarter than the guy who posted this nonsense about asyncio, that's for sure, but that's a very low bar... Now, when it comes to Python, then, it's an environment that is flooded with the programmers with the lowest skill level imaginable. This is where all those month-long bootcamps pump their graduates, this is where all the people who took a month-long intro to CS with Python class go, this is where a lot of people who only use Python accidentally, to compliment some other programming activity (or just general computer-related activity) go. It's a swamp, and there's no reason to pretend it isn't. On the other hand, anyone who had any serious aspirations for Python left the scene ten or so years ago. Today, Python is the worst parts of Java and PHP combined. So, again, it's a very low bar to be better than most Python programmers. Without even trying, when I searched for a job and had to do a bunch of automated assessment tests, I was consistently placed in the "best" decile, often in the "best 5%" of all applicants, and I hate the language. I'm honestly not good at it and don't want to be good at it. You don't need to try hard to be "as good" as I am, because I'm not good... but, yeah, in this particular area everyone is hands down awful. I also had to interview about two dozens of applicants in my last job. I had people who couldn't explain the difference between expression and statement. I had people who couldn't tell what __str__() method is for. I had extremely low expectations, and yet I was consistently disappointed by the knowledge level of applicants. It's surreal what's going on there. --- > Overhead startup isn't worthless. Yeah, maybe... OP never measured it anyways. OP never created any asynchronous I/O tasks. OP measured how long does it take to run couple functions in Python. Admittedly, it takes a long time, but it's irrelevant to async I/O. Especially in the context of comparing whatever OP's doing to threads. Which was their goal stated in the opening statement.
- greenshackle2 4y ago
  > automated assessment tests, I was consistently placed in the "best" decile Of course you were. I'd expect that for a large fraction of gainfully employed devs. People who can't code their way out of a paper bag are way over-represented in tech screens. Because a highly competent dev will apply at 3 companies they choose and get a job. A terrible dev will do 100 applications and see what sticks. We opened a ML intern position recently and got over 200 applications and 95% of them were terrible. Should I conclude most ML grads are incompetent? I don't think so... probably 190 of them are the bottom 5% of the local market, and these same 190 CVs are on the desk - well, in the rubbish bin - of everyone with an open position right now.

crabbone 4y ago

> This reply strongly reads of 'im smarter than eveyone' Dude, where's everyone, where? I'm smarter than the guy who posted this nonsense about asyncio, that's for sure, but that's a very low bar... Now, when it comes to Python, then, it's an environment that is flooded with the programmers with the lowest skill level imaginable. This is where all those month-long bootcamps pump their graduates, this is where all the people who took a month-long intro to CS with Python class go, this is where a lot of people who only use Python accidentally, to compliment some other programming activity (or just general computer-related activity) go. It's a swamp, and there's no reason to pretend it isn't. On the other hand, anyone who had any serious aspirations for Python left the scene ten or so years ago. Today, Python is the worst parts of Java and PHP combined. So, again, it's a very low bar to be better than most Python programmers. Without even trying, when I searched for a job and had to do a bunch of automated assessment tests, I was consistently placed in the "best" decile, often in the "best 5%" of all applicants, and I hate the language. I'm honestly not good at it and don't want to be good at it. You don't need to try hard to be "as good" as I am, because I'm not good... but, yeah, in this particular area everyone is hands down awful. I also had to interview about two dozens of applicants in my last job. I had people who couldn't explain the difference between expression and statement. I had people who couldn't tell what __str__() method is for. I had extremely low expectations, and yet I was consistently disappointed by the knowledge level of applicants. It's surreal what's going on there. --- > Overhead startup isn't worthless. Yeah, maybe... OP never measured it anyways. OP never created any asynchronous I/O tasks. OP measured how long does it take to run couple functions in Python. Admittedly, it takes a long time, but it's irrelevant to async I/O. Especially in the context of comparing whatever OP's doing to threads. Which was their goal stated in the opening statement.

greenshackle2 4y ago
> automated assessment tests, I was consistently placed in the "best" decile Of course you were. I'd expect that for a large fraction of gainfully employed devs. People who can't code their way out of a paper bag are way over-represented in tech screens. Because a highly competent dev will apply at 3 companies they choose and get a job. A terrible dev will do 100 applications and see what sticks. We opened a ML intern position recently and got over 200 applications and 95% of them were terrible. Should I conclude most ML grads are incompetent? I don't think so... probably 190 of them are the bottom 5% of the local market, and these same 190 CVs are on the desk - well, in the rubbish bin - of everyone with an open position right now.