Re: Every opportunity taken (Was: Does anyone know how to configure a Brother MFC...)
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 20:38:04 +0100 deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Martin Read wrote:
>
> > On 15/03/16 07:45, deloptes wrote:
> >> I see recently more python code written than real C/C++.
> >
> > So what? Most programs *shouldn't* be written in C or C++, and I say
> > this as someone who loves C and C++ and reaches for one of them by
> > default as the language for solving computing problems. (Unless they
> > involve substantial quantities of text manipulation, in which case I
> > reach for Perl because neither C nor C++ have even *remotely*
> > satisfactory capabilities in that regard.)
> >
> > There are specific circumstances in which a low/medium-level systems
> > programming language like C or C++ is the right choice for
> > implementing solutions to a computing problem. I submit that *most*
> > programs are not subject to those circumstances, and thus there are
> > better languages for implementing most programs.
> >
> > Python is probably the right language less often than people use
> > it, but for most jobs people do with it, C or C++ would be just as
> > wrong a choice, if not more so.
>
> I agree with you more or less, however languages like python or perl
> open doors to pretend-to-be-programmers. I've seen more often bad
> python/perl code than c/c++.
C/C++ arrogance at its best! I could maybe understand it if you called
C# or Java users pretend-to-be-programmers, but Python, and especially
Perl, really aren't as bad or as threatening as you make them out to be.
> My observations are also that there is always a penalty, even if you
> compile the script code into binary. So if something has to be robust
> and fast, one should always prefer c/c++. But this is really out of
> topic here.
And if Python or Perl are more suited to the task at hand, by all means
use them!
P.S. What's wrong with OT? OT is fun!
Reply to: