C++ bad-mouthing (was: Why learn Python ??)

[Donn Cave]

In article <40041576.D070723E at engcorp.com>,
 Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> wrote:

> Donn Cave wrote:
> > 
> > Python has the advantage of a clean start, but
> > from a software engineering standpoint it really seems like a
> > hacker language.  
> 
> Ohh.... nice controversial statement. :-)
> 
> I would strongly disagree with the above statement for a number
> of reasons, including (random thoughts):
> 
>  - packages
>  - interactive interpreter
>  - no static typing
>  - high productivity
>  - ease of testing
>  - flexibility
>  - extremely broad library support
>  - low learning curve
> 
> and probably a dozen others.  I think this has all been discussed before,
> though, so I won't belabour the point.  Basically, as a software engineer
> (nominally a "Systems Design Engineer") I find Python to be hands down 
> *the* best language I've encountered for use in serious work.  I can't
> actually think of another which excels on so many fronts.

But your list describes the perfect hacker language, at
least on some counts.  I'm nominally a Software Engineer
myself, but I have no formal CS education and have never
worked on a large project, so I feel right at home with
the hacker culture here.  But help me out here, suppose
we're going to go in and develop one of those massive
projects - I don't know, say the IRS needs a new computer
system - what on that list would we care about?

Maybe vague promises like high productivity and ease of
testing would be attractive, but anyone can say that for
some ideal context.  Library support is probably not even
on the charts.  I would think a major consideration at
the outset of a project like this would be whether the
code that all these teams is writing will eventually come
together and work like it's supposed to, and from that
point of view it's tempting to look for some support for
architectural consistency, like "interfaces" and that sort
of thing.

   Donn Cave, donn at u.washington.edu