PYTHON IS CRAP

[Darren Young]

>sp00fD> Look at the number of books available for java though.  The
>sp00fD> majority are specific to one topic (i.e. EJB or Swing, etc.).
>sp00fD> It's often said that the number of books available controls
>sp00fD> the usage of a language (which is somewhat of a chicken/egg
>sp00fD> thing).  For me that's definitely true, but in the negative
>sp00fD> sense.
>
>This "book metric of languages" is a interesting observation.
>
>I would say that the average Perl programmer has a pretty good
>collection of books about how to contruct executable line noise.  At
>least one of those books would always open on the desk next to the
>programmer.
>
>Contrast this with the average Python programmer who probably doesn't
>even own a Python book - they don't need them.


I bought a Python book just to get the crash course in it's style and
syntax. I haven't really touched it since. The biggest reason is Pythonwin
and it's auto-completion. I've been lugging around my Perl books for _so_
many years that my back hurts.

I guess between Python and the available tools, it would be in the category
of 'low aerobic impact' language...

I've been following this thread and again see that people try to hit
everything with the same hammer. If you're looking for raw performance, use
C/C++, if you want obtuse, use Perl, if you want a good all around scripting
language, use Python. Your back will thank you.

My two cents were left at the door.
>
>- Dave
>--
>http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>