3 ms·

Python is good because the barriers of entry are almost non-existent. Of the widely used languages, it was the one that closest resembled to writing pseudo cod

Python is good because the barriers of entry are almost non-existent. Of the widely used languages, it was the one that closest resembled to writing pseudo code. It removed a lot of friction, for people starting with programming. And since it has every library under the sun, that made it really easy for non-SWE people to use it as a tool. That is the reason it will continue to dominate the market. Until someone makes a language which is even easier to start with, Python will sit firmly on its throne. (My personal theory is that LLMs will become so advanced, that writing your spoken language will be the next, and that programming languages will kind of become abstracted away.)

cyberpunk 2y ago
It's such a shame that it's more popular than ruby. It's such a better language overall.
- pansa2 2y ago
  Ruby's object system is much nicer than Python's, but Ruby has plenty of warts of its own. For example: extremely complex syntax compared to Python's LL(1), overloaded constructs like blocks/procs/lambdas (whereas Python just has functions), and cryptic Perl-isms ($_ etc).
  - Qem 2y ago
    Another example, initial setup is beginner-unfriendly. No IDLE-like barebones editor provided out-of-the-box in the standard install, just the REPL. Anything beyond that you must figure out and configure by yourself.
- BiteCode_dev 2y ago
  Most rubists like the optional parenthesis, but I suspect must devs don't.
thrdbndndn 2y ago
I completely agree. As an amateur programmer, I started with JavaScript before moving to Python. Even now, many JavaScript patterns seem nonsensical to me. (/rant on) The infamous callback hell, the IIFE, and the default-to-async behavior (when using outside the browser), are look like anti-pattern to me in most of cases. I understand there benefits, I just don't think they're worth it. The syntax doesn't help either—after getting used to Python's simplicity, the excessive use of parentheses and brackets alone is off-putting. For something as simple as iteration, there are countless methods, yet none of which are particularly appealing (and I don't why someone thinks it's a good idea to have both `for of` and `for in`). You can't even iterate over some common object types without resorting to things like `[...someList].forEach` or `Array.from(someList)`. This should be built-in, even just as syntactic sugar. To make matters worse, a lot of professional JavaScript code seems intentionally written to resemble a puzzle rather than a straightforward workflow.
Terretta 2y ago
> Python is good because the barriers of entry are almost non-existent. Spoken like* a person for whom none of the barriers are about having two people work on two or more things running on two or more systems. :-) Barrier to comprehension is incredibly low. Barrier to doing it yourself, also incredibly low. Barrier to sharing what you made? Possibly impossible to resolve. * Note: I'm not saying you're such a person, or would personally have difficulty getting 2+ systems to successfully operate 2+ independent python developer projects. Just -- the barrier to multiple collaborations has been nuts. TL;DR: High hopes for `uv` ...

cyberpunk 2y ago

It's such a shame that it's more popular than ruby. It's such a better language overall.

pansa2 2y ago
Ruby's object system is much nicer than Python's, but Ruby has plenty of warts of its own. For example: extremely complex syntax compared to Python's LL(1), overloaded constructs like blocks/procs/lambdas (whereas Python just has functions), and cryptic Perl-isms ($_ etc).
- Qem 2y ago
  Another example, initial setup is beginner-unfriendly. No IDLE-like barebones editor provided out-of-the-box in the standard install, just the REPL. Anything beyond that you must figure out and configure by yourself.
BiteCode_dev 2y ago
Most rubists like the optional parenthesis, but I suspect must devs don't.

thrdbndndn 2y ago

I completely agree. As an amateur programmer, I started with JavaScript before moving to Python. Even now, many JavaScript patterns seem nonsensical to me. (/rant on) The infamous callback hell, the IIFE, and the default-to-async behavior (when using outside the browser), are look like anti-pattern to me in most of cases. I understand there benefits, I just don't think they're worth it. The syntax doesn't help either—after getting used to Python's simplicity, the excessive use of parentheses and brackets alone is off-putting. For something as simple as iteration, there are countless methods, yet none of which are particularly appealing (and I don't why someone thinks it's a good idea to have both `for of` and `for in`). You can't even iterate over some common object types without resorting to things like `[...someList].forEach` or `Array.from(someList)`. This should be built-in, even just as syntactic sugar. To make matters worse, a lot of professional JavaScript code seems intentionally written to resemble a puzzle rather than a straightforward workflow.

Terretta 2y ago

> Python is good because the barriers of entry are almost non-existent. Spoken like* a person for whom none of the barriers are about having two people work on two or more things running on two or more systems. :-) Barrier to comprehension is incredibly low. Barrier to doing it yourself, also incredibly low. Barrier to sharing what you made? Possibly impossible to resolve. * Note: I'm not saying you're such a person, or would personally have difficulty getting 2+ systems to successfully operate 2+ independent python developer projects. Just -- the barrier to multiple collaborations has been nuts. TL;DR: High hopes for `uv` ...