3 ms·

It would be interesting to read a similar article from a company that uses python as their core programming language (Dropbox for instance) to contrast it with

It would be interesting to read a similar article from a company that uses python as their core programming language (Dropbox for instance) to contrast it with this one. Python might not be as popular as Java but I was under the impression that it offered a rich enough platform/ecosystem to accommodate for a wide spectrum of software projects. Concerning the issue of type checking, I understand that it's great to have a compiler that can take care of that for you but I'm pretty sure unit-tests and a bit more care also goes a long way when using a scripting language like Python; besides how hard can it be to sprinkle a bit of "type(<object>) is" in your code where type checking is required? (smile) I wonder if vert.x was also considered. I don't see any mention of it in the article.

lgieron 13y ago
I'd say having automatic compile-time checks and vs having to be "extra careful" + necessity for more umit tests is a world of difference. AFAIK, Google doesn't use dynamic-typed languages for any of its projects (except where their hand was forced - they inherited the codebase in an acquisition) and they sure as hell are experienced in large-scale software development (for small to medium projects, the drawbacks of python etc. aren't as apparent).
- okaram 13y ago
  I'm not sure what you consider google 'projects'; from what I heard, a lot of their 'sysadmin' type of scripting is in python (probably moving to go now)
  - lgieron 13y ago
    By "projects" I mean code delivering actual software products (like for example the search, gmail etc.), not some auxiliary admin scripts.
CmonDev 13y ago
"pretty sure unit-tests and a bit more care" - it's better to focus on unit-testing behaviour and care about things that need human's input though. "where type checking is required" - it's better to single out cases where it is not required, this is how it's done in C# for example - quite useful for integration with other ecosystems.

lgieron 13y ago

I'd say having automatic compile-time checks and vs having to be "extra careful" + necessity for more umit tests is a world of difference. AFAIK, Google doesn't use dynamic-typed languages for any of its projects (except where their hand was forced - they inherited the codebase in an acquisition) and they sure as hell are experienced in large-scale software development (for small to medium projects, the drawbacks of python etc. aren't as apparent).

okaram 13y ago
I'm not sure what you consider google 'projects'; from what I heard, a lot of their 'sysadmin' type of scripting is in python (probably moving to go now)
- lgieron 13y ago
  By "projects" I mean code delivering actual software products (like for example the search, gmail etc.), not some auxiliary admin scripts.

CmonDev 13y ago

"pretty sure unit-tests and a bit more care" - it's better to focus on unit-testing behaviour and care about things that need human's input though. "where type checking is required" - it's better to single out cases where it is not required, this is how it's done in C# for example - quite useful for integration with other ecosystems.