Posted Aug 25, 2008 10:15 UTC (Mon) by pboddie
In reply to: Offtopic: Python
Parent article: Chandler finally reaches a 1.0 release
If it was in C++, bah, you get compilation error immediately. But in Python the program would happily work ever after, until some day the thing would finally go there and explode.
Of course this kind of thing never happens with C++ programs, oh no! I've never seen the KDE crash dialogue from a C++ program ever!
I don't like how it turns out in reality, though, because what we have as a result seems to me to be more like "more code done by less competent people".
And thus we reach the heart of this critique: people who choose not to use statically-typed systems programming languages are not "übercoders" and must thereby form a queue at the "script monkey" counter.
While Python is more powerful than that, I'd still rather not see it being used to create programs for mainstream desktop use, although I think it's ok to use it in dedicated environments with known resources, like web development (whether this is beneficial or wasteful is up to the producer to decide, I as the consumer wouldn't care much).
What's fascinating is seeing desktop developers with the kind of attitude exhibited here implement their daemons and services listening on sockets with a level of robustness that would fall short in most Web application deployments, with the code typically wrapped up in monolithic bundles which typically need a big recompile after the most trivial adjustment, frequently architected with dubious integration to the user interface, thus keeping the oft-stated holy grail of component-based desktops as distant as ever. All this hardly makes the "mainstream desktop" development experience more pleasurable, which is why languages like Python seem to be gaining support in the big two free desktops despite the systems programming snobbery present in the upper echelons (especially of the one whose name begins with K).
to post comments)