pro python paper

[Paul McGuire]

<beliavsky at aol.com> wrote in message
news:3064b51d.0408100549.213dad5 at posting.google.com...
> ccdetail at gmail.com (ccdetail) wrote in message
news:<305aa162.0408091905.5bce8f9a at posting.google.com>...
> > http://www.journyx.com/pdf/PythonAtAGlance.pdf
> >
> > the above paper is a response to some of our prospects complaints
> >
> > they were asking us why we use python
> >
> > thought you guys might be interested
> >
> > http://journyx.com/clf
>
> I think the paper exaggerates the virtues of Python relative to other
> languages, reducing the credibility of the authors.
<snip>
>

I like Python as much as the next person, but I too thought that the article
was a bit "glowy".  The Key Advantages section especially is made up of
unsupported claims, such as:

"Python is considered by many to be one of, if not *the* premier language
for GUI development..." (Huh? by whom, and compared to what?? - VB? Delphi?
C#? And toolkits like Tk, Qt, etc. are not bound to Python as their
language, so I don't see how they come up with this assertion)
"The Python community is populated by the best minds in software today."
(not to slight any of the Python elite, but I don't think we have a monopoly
on the best minds in software - the Java and C++ milieu can be pretty
impressive, not to mention Lisp, et al.)
"If you need to tie in something written in another language, you can do it
easily." (yes, it CAN be done, but at no less overhead than tying VB and C#,
or C and FORTRAN - so where is the Python edge?)

The countering of the Python Myths reminds me of this MP routine:
"This isn't an argument, it's just contradiction!"
"No it's not!"

While I agree with many of the sentiments expressed, I'm not sure wrapping
them in the format of a white-paper (with such breathless prose!) actually
increases their power or credibility.  A little more concrete supporting
info will go a long way here.

-- Paul