Is there no end to Python?
jeff at schwabcenter.com
Sat Mar 18 16:26:00 CET 2006
Jeffrey Schwab wrote:
> Steve Holden wrote:
>> No need for flames. I'll content myself with pointing out that most
>> 1.5.2 programs will run unchanged in 2.5, so the backwards
>> compatibility picture is very good. Nobody makes you use the new
> They do if you ever want to read their code. The point of view you've
> just summarized is what causes languages to become write-only.
Sorry, that came out a lot ruder than I meant it.
I've always heard that Python was extremely easy to learn. I'm still
fairly new to the language, though (2.2), and I have not found it any
easier to learn than Perl or Ruby. It's great that all these new
features have been added, but if I want power at the expense of
intuitive language constructs, I'll stick to C++.
More information about the Python-list