Am 11.06.2012 06:05, schrieb rusi:
If python is really a "language maven's" language then it does not do very well: - its not as object-oriented as Ruby (or other arcana like Eiffel) - its not as functional as Haskell - its not as integrable as Lua - its not as close-to-bare-metal as C - etc
Depends on the definition. Maybe, that Python is not a perfect language from an academic point of view, but it's a good choice for anyone looking for a pragmatic programming language.
Then why is it up-there among our most popular languages? Because of the 'batteries included.'
It's not only the batteries, but also the language itself. As someone wrote a long time ago "Python fits my brain".
And not having a good gui-builder is a battery (cell?) that is lacking.
It's a cell that would make it much easier to compete with other languages/environments. These environments need not necessarily be classical programming language, but could also be Labview, Matlab etc. And regarding popularity, I see very much potential. I have been working for two high-tech companies and I have never met anyone else using Python there. Focus is not classical databases, but data acquisition and processing. Many are still using VB, some are even using HT/HP-BASIC. Quite a lot moved to Labview, some are using Matlab or thinking about moving to it. The ones who actually see the point the advantages of a general purpose language moved to C#. (Nobody is using Java in this context as it obviously would not make any sense.) Anyway, I don't see how people could be persuaded to use a console-only environment, which - realistically - Python is at the moment for most people. From what I see, Python is recognized as a language for scripting and maybe for web servers, but not as a general purpose language to implement GUI software. (To make it clear: I have been using Python as a general purpose language for many years.) Regards, Dietmar -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
