On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:05 AM, BartC <b...@freeuk.com> wrote: > On 29/01/2017 01:35, pavlovevide...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 9:24:56 AM UTC-8, bream...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 >>> >>> Kindest regards. >>> >>> Mark Lawrence. >> >> >> I remember the old days of Python when it was just Perl's little brother. >> Sometimes I feel moments of amazement whenever someone makes this much of an >> effort to badmouth it (and this blog is definitely badmouthing it, very >> little of criticism is reasonable). > > > I think it's completely reasonable for anyone to criticise Python if they > want (or any other computer language for that matter). > > (And it didn't cover that much; I could do a far more in-depth critique if I > wanted.) > > What might be unreasonable is to criticise it in a /Python/ group full of > language aficionados who are going to view every feature and quirk of the > language in a good light; nothing is ever a problem! > > But the author of piece didn't post it here.
It's completely reasonable for someone to critique Python. It's not reasonable to post a bunch of baseless FUD, regardless of your forum. There's plenty in Python that you can legitimately criticise. Sometimes you'll get a response of "actually this is good, because X, Y, Z"; sometimes you get "well, what you suggest is marginally better, but not enough to justify breaking backward compatibility"; and sometimes you get "good point, maybe we can change that in the next version - want to write a patch?". But when all your criticisms are either (a) true of virtually every programming language, yet you claim they're Python's faults; or (b) actually false, you just make yourself look like a troll. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
