retard wrote:
Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:22:10 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
bearophile wrote:
Right. But what people care in the end is programs that get the work
done. If a mix of Python plus C/C++ libs are good enough and handy
enough then they get used. For example I am able to use the PIL Python
lib with Python to load, save and process jpeg images at high-speed
with few lines of handy code. So I don't care if PIL is written in C++:
http://www.pythonware.com/products/pil/
Sure, but that's not about the language. It's about the richness of the
ecosystem that supports the language, and Python certainly has a rich
one.
I thought D was supposed to be a practical language for real world
problems. This 'D is good because everything can and must be written in
D' is beginning to sound like a religion. To me it seems the Python way
is more practical in all ways. Even novice programmers can produce
efficient programs with it by using a mixture of low level C/C++ libs and
high level python scripts.
I agree that Python isn't as fast as D and it lacks type safety things
and so on, but in the end of day the Python coder gets the job done while
the D coder still fights with inline assembler, compiler bugs, porting
the app, fighting the type system (mostly purity/constness issues).
Python has more libs available, you need to write less code to implement
the same functionality and it's all less troublesome because the lack of
type annotations. So it's really understandable why a greater amount
people favor Python.
You don't actually have to use pure, const, inline assembler, etc. D is
a wonderful language to just do string-and-hashtable code in. All the
other features are there to help bigger projects (contracts, yay!) or
projects with special needs (I for one have never needed inline ASM).
