Python advocacy

[Ran]

Paul Prescod wrote:
 
> Well, thus far all response has been positive!

It's early yet.  Even by net standards  ;-)

There's a fundamental problem with your argument that makes any
comparison among languages moot,  anyway:  your "scalability" criterion
is a myth that just doesn't fit the real world.

There's no single continuum of "easy to difficult problems".  Nor is
there one from "beginners" to "experts".  There are significant
*qualitative* differences among problem domains,  and significantly
different programming styles and methodologies (with differing degrees
of usability/appropriateness to the different domains).  A single person
can be an "expert" hacker,  a "mediocre" engineer,  and a "rank
beginner" systems analyst.

Each applications area has characteristics that make some languages
"ideal",  others "problematic",  and sometimes even some of them
"dangerous" to use.

And the same applies to developers:  different people have different
approaches to solving problems.  Some languages will fit a particular
person's temperament and abilities,  and some won't.

A "Perl-vs-C-vs-Python-vs-APL-vs..." argument is equivalent one about
"hacksaw-vs-screwdriver-vs-scalpel-vs-tweezers":  it may have some
amusement value,  but any real-world benefits are an accidental
by-product.

Ran