3 ms·
Well, part of it is really Python's age and legacy. We are talking about going back to 1996. So much of python's development was ducktape through history in res
by delfinom 3y ago
Well, part of it is really Python's age and legacy. We are talking about going back to 1996. So much of python's development was ducktape through history in response to the changing world and whims of the contributors.
I'm not saying it's an excuse but it's just how it got to where it was. Newer languages have alot of lessons learnt to build upon to be decent from day 0.
- ecshafer 3y agoJava and ruby are similar ages as python and dependencies are much better stories there.
- fbdab103 3y agoRuby never had nearly the FFI/other language problem as Python so could almost entirely focus on Ruby-code delivery.
- cesarb 3y agoThe same for Java, since its ecosystem has an allergy to calling native (non-JVM) code, to the point of rewriting perfectly good libraries in Java. When they do call native code, it's often in horrible ways (like copying a native library from within the JAR file to a temporary directory, and loading it from there, the JAR file coming with pre-compiled native libraries for all possible operating system and architecture combinations). So the Java package managers mostly focus on Java (and other JVM languages) code building and delivery.
- pjmlp 3y agoMaven and Gradle support building C and C++ libraries just fine.
- IshKebab 3y agoWhile this may be true, they've also had literal decades to improve the situation and have barely got anywhere. In some ways they've gone backwards!