On 19 Dec 2004 16:22:03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: > >I'm curious about that last statement. Are you saying that if you > >write, full time, code for "production", that fluency will decrease? Or > >that the nifty recent features of Python (generators, etc.) are not > >useful in "production" code? > > Well, much of my code is maintenance rather than new code, ... > addition, our base version is currently still 2.2
Both points are quite common in the wider world of industry. At work we have Python available on our corporate web site but its still v 1.5.1 because few people use it and its rarely updated. On our departmental server we are at 2.2 and the next uplift will not be till next May at the earliest. Thats when the annual tools audit gets done... Python is not our primary language, in fact its not even on our preferred tools list, its only tolerated because a few of us have managed to sneak a few things in. But even our copy of gcc is version 2.9.5 and C++ is one of our 3 primary languages. A lot of this has to do with risk avoidance - better the devil you know and compatibility over lots of different machines. And finally, whether it be maintenance or new code many organisations tend to write the same kind of programs. You get to know the language features you need but not the ones that are out of your area. (A long time ago I used to write embedded software in C, it was only when I went on a training course for C++ that I realized I'd forgotten how to do string handling in C - we only had LEDs for I/O...! :-) Alan G. Author of the Learn to Program website http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
