Python vs. C#
cbarber at curl.com
Thu Aug 14 00:34:42 CEST 2003
"Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at udel.edu> writes:
> "Christopher Barber" <cbarber at curl.com> wrote in message
> news:pso8yq0b1d3.fsf at bandit.curl.com...
> > "Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at udel.edu> writes:
> > > "Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery at 3DProgrammer.com> wrote in
> > > news:3f357a9b at shknews01...
> > > > What can I do with Python that I can't do with C#?
> > >
> > > Given that all Turing complete languages are theoretically
> > > nothing, either way.
> > Turing equivalence is probably the least interesting property of any
> > programming language and says absolutely nothing about its
> suitability for
> > real programming tasks.
> This is a paraphrase of what I said. So why did you silently clip the
> remainder of my post where I went on to discuss practical suitability?
I quoted you verbatim, there is no paraphrasing here, although I did clip the
rest of the article. I only meant to express the opinion that there is no
point in ever bringing up Turing equivalance when comparing languages (unless
of course they are not Turing equivalent!). Turing equivalence only addresses
what computations you may perform, not what programs you may write.
More information about the Python-list