Python vs. C++ Builder - speed of development

[Laura Creighton]

> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 23:21:14 +0000, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> > I don't have the Python experience.  I do have the C++ experience.  You
> > guys' talk of the horror and gloom and doom of C++ sounds like another
> > planet to me.  So clearly I'm having some kind of experience in C++ that yo
> u
> > are not having.  What it sounds like, is you guys blow your legs off with
> > all the fancy C++ stuff, because you're in group environments where people
> > don't know how to Keep It Simple Stupid.
> 
> Fact is, if you aren't aware of the "C++ doom and gloom" you are a really
> bad C++ programmer, it's virtually certain you've only worked on toy
> problems, and you are going to be bitten in the ass real hard one day.

I don't know about that.  I am getting the sense that he has a problem
domain which he can define and manipulate in a nice orderly subset of
C++ and thus doesn't fall into holes.  But what puzzles me is why, if
this is the case, he insists on painting his room with a toothbrush :-).  
C++ is the tool to get out when you need to get real close to the machine, 
and you need classes.   If you don't need that, I recommend finding the 
highest-level language there is which has a good fit with your problem 
domain. But I do this because it is way more _fun_, regardless of other
advantages.  I think that Brandon Van Every and I get joy in very different 
ways.  So perhaps this would not work for him.

Laura Creighton