Brandon's abrasive style (was Re: What's better about Ruby than Python?)

[Dave Brueck]

Ramon Leon Fournier <moncho.leon at gmx.net> wrote in message news:<bhtsck$37jp5$1 at ID-114614.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> Brandon J. Van Every <vanevery at 3DProgrammer.com> wrote:
> > - Python is not a good language for low-level 3D graphics problems.  C++ is
> > better.
> 
> Well, not just for low-level 3D graphics. There are many other things
> you would not code in Python unless you are a complete fool. Your
> companies mail server, for instance.

Actually, that's not a very good example - Python is *very* well
suited for many types of servers, mail servers included. The I/O heavy
nature of many servers lessens the significance of Python being slow
in terms of raw CPU speed. Lots of I/O can also mean the effects of
the GIL less of a factor on multi-CPU boxes than they otherwise would
be. Finally, given the fact that you don't see too many buffer
overruns and other similar security holes in Python, I'd sleep
*better* at night implementing my server in Python than in C++.

But I do agree with the notion that Python isn't good for *all*
problems, as does everyone else it seems. ;-)

-Dave