Python advocacy

Tim Peters tim_one at email.msn.com
Sat Mar 4 03:48:22 CET 2000


[Brett g Porter]
> Obviously, Paul is entitled to his view that the cost of proficiency in
> C++ is too high. As a proficient C++ programmer, I have to disagree. I
> can't imagine writing industrial-strength apps solely in Python.

[Fredrik Lundh]
> what if Python would grow a type system?
>
> and an industrial-strength compiler, on top of that?
>
> is there *anything* you can do in C++ that you
> couldn't express in a typed version of Python?

Hmm.  At work this week, I defined a C++ class whose instances occupy
exactly one byte (& would be useless if they occupied more), and had some
methods whose bodies consisted of inline assembler #ifdef'ed for various
platforms.  C++ was perfect for this low-level grunge, while Python is about
as far from being suitable as I can imagine.  Ask me whether I care <wink>.

just-hoping-to-*invoke*-this-class-web-via-python-ly y'rs  - tim






More information about the Python-list mailing list