[OT] Python like lanugages [was Re: After C++, what with Python?]

[Tim Harig]

In comp.lang.python, you wrote:
> Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 13:25:
>> If I didn't think Python was a good language, I wouldn't be here.
>> Nevertheless, it isn't a good fit for many pieces of software where a
>> systems language is better suited.  Reasons include ease of distribution
>> without an interpeter, non-necessity of distributing source with the
>> product, ability to leverage multiple CPU and multicore systems, and
>> simple sequential performance.
>>
>> Given that Python does't work well in many areas, we could just give up
>> and accept having to write C++ for our day jobs or we can look for a
>> language which bridges the gap between those tasks that require C++'s
>> level of control and those which work well for dynamic languages.
>> Java attempted to do that, and has the market share to show that the
>> concept works, but I think that it missed the mark for many needs.  It is
>> still much lower level then Python for purposes of rapid developement
>> and too slow to be competative for non-long-lived tasks.
>
> So seriously need to take a look at Cython.
>
> http://cython.org

One of the arguments for Python has always made is that you can optimize
it by writing the most important parts in C.  Perhaps that is a crutch
that has held the communty back from seeking higher performance solutions
in the language itself.

I prefer a single language as opposed to a creolization of two.  Go gives
me more less complete independence from C.  I can write pretty much
anything I would like using almost pure Go and because it generates a
native binary with similar performance to C, I don't need to resort to
using another language.  I certainly don't need to require anybody who
wants to use a program I have compiled to install an interpreter.