3 ms·
I'm arguing against the point that it clearly did have the easiest syntax compared to the competition back then and not because Google was using it. Even if it
by codexon 4y ago
I'm arguing against the point that it clearly did have the easiest syntax compared to the competition back then and not because Google was using it.
Even if it doesn't have the best syntax now (which I doubt), the tooling and libraries make it a better choice over any language that have an edge over python syntax.
- eru 4y ago> I'm arguing against the point that it clearly did have the easiest syntax compared to the competition back then and not because Google was using it. Maybe, not sure? My point was that both the syntax and Google using it was more relevant 15 years ago than now. (I don't have much of an opinion on the 15+ years ago thing.)
- codexon 4y agoI don't see any reason for it to be less true now. Is python syntax worse than any brand new languages like rust or go? Absolutely not. It's still better. Did Google stop using it? I don't think so, but I also don't think people picked it just because Google did.
- eru 4y agoPython's syntax is ok. Btw, I wish they would take some inspiration from Haskell's syntax. Haskell also has significant whitespace, but its defined as syntactic sugar for a more traditionally syntax with curly braces and semicolons. Approximately no-one uses that curly-brace syntax, but it's good for two things: - silences the naysayers - more importantly: allows you to copy-paste code even into forms that mess up your indentation.
- joquarky 4y agoIn a few years, none of this is going to matter anyway since it is likely we will be able to automatically translate everything cheaply.