From: Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gabriel Sechan wrote:
Disagree- you're comparing apples to oranges. If you want to include
Python's libraries, then you need to include the fact their 10 billion XML
libraries for C. So it would be far far faster for him to learn a library
in C than to learn Python and its library.
We are going to have to agree to disagree, then.
Almost all of the C/C++ gods I have met would eschew C/C++ for this kind of
stuff and reach for a different language. That's kind of telling.
And almost none of them I know would. Funny how that works. Most of them
would quit rather than touch Python in particular.
Java, Perl, Python, Tcl, Lisp, etc. are *very* obviously faster to
develop in than C/C++ except for very specific instances.
Disagree. Whatever you know best is fastest. I can code in C or C++ at
several times the speed of switching to any other language.
That may be true, but even a fairly average Java/Python/Perl/Tcl/Lisp/etc.
user will stomp you flat in productivity except for very specific problems.
No, they wouldn't. If I had to write the libraries myself, sure. Writing
libraries takes time. If they have a library and I do, it will take the
same time (assuming we have the same programming skill, understanding of the
technology, etc).
The reason people usually make this claim is that they compare Java+standard
library to C without any libraries. This is not an apples to apples
comparison. There is nothing ab0out the syntax of those other languages
which make it more productive. Nothing.
THe idea of one language being better than another for "productivity" is
pure bullshit. No language is more productive than any other, except for
personal experience in it. What tends to speed or not speed things up is
availability of libraries that can reduce the need to write code.
Then why do you use any language above assembly? Assembly with libraries
should be the fastest, no?
If you're most familiar with assembly, yes. Back in college when I used asm
frequently, I was pumping out programs in asm faster than many were in
$language_of_choice. I gave up on asm in favor of portability and not
wishing to relearn the optimization rules for the umpteen versions of the
x86 architecture.
I will throw a caveat in here- if you're trying to get optimal speed, that
will be slower to write. But thats additional functionality you're adding
over the easy assembly solution.
I miss assembly programming, I ought to do more of it. Far more fun than
any other language.
Gabe
_________________________________________________________________
From photos to predictions, The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes has
it all. http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline1
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
