Python Productivity over C++

[Christian Tanzer]

"Frank V. Castellucci" <frankc at colconsulting.com> wrote :

> > > 2. There is the type information in standard conforming compilers.
> > 
> > Nowadays, there is.
> 
> Agreed, but the language had the ability for you to write your own, or
> use someone else's library which provided the same.

Sure it provides it. But you have to implement it. And that costs
time.

The decisive difference is:

- in C++ you have to add RTTI code to every class in the class
  hierarchy -- it is simply impossible to factor the behavior into the
  root of the hierarchy. 

- In Python, you can implement the entire mechanism needed in the root
  of the hierarchy.

Of course, nobody forces you to do that, and you might end up with
exactly the same design as in C++.

> Every language has a painful aspect to itself. Some take more time to
> correct than others.

Sure. But you can still compare the total amount of pain and the time
it costs you. And here, Python comes out way ahead.

If the problem mandates it, you might still have to use C++. But you'll
need more development time. And it is less fun to use C++.

> I try not to pick a language for implementation until I am happy that
> problem space is adequately defined, a reasonable degree of requirement
> specification have been put forth, a sound analysis and design has been
> done, and a language is available which satisfies the solution space. As
> a contract developer this time alloted to perform these tasks may span
> from one weekend by myself to many months with teams of people.
> Sometimes the people who hire me decide the language before these steps.
> I do the best I can.

Great. I hope we all do (though I met too many people who don't).

-- 
Christian Tanzer                                         tanzer at swing.co.at
Glasauergasse 32                                       Tel: +43 1 876 62 36
A-1130 Vienna, Austria                                 Fax: +43 1 877 66 92