FAQ

On 10 September 2015 at 12:07, Brendan Barnwell wrote:
On 2015-09-09 14:50, Andrew Barnert via Python-ideas wrote:

Well, have you read the answers given by Nick, me, and others earlier
in the thread? If so, what do you disagree with? You've only
addressed one point (that % is faster than {} for simple cases--and
your solution is just "make {} faster", which may not be possible
given that it's inherently more hookable than % and therefore
requires more function calls...). What about formatting headers for
ASCII wire protocols, sharing tables of format strings between
programming languages (e.g., for i18n), or any of the other reasons
people have brought up?

This getting off on a tangent, but I don't see most of those as
super compelling. Any programming language can use whatever formatting
scheme it likes. Keeping %-substitutions around helps in sharing format
strings only with other languages that use exactly the same formatting
style. So it's not like % has any intrinsic gain; it just happens to
interoperate with some other particular stuff. That's nice, but I don't
think it makes sense to keep things in Python just so it can interoperate in
specific ways with specific other languages that use less-readable syntax.

This perspective doesn't grant enough credit to the significance of C
in general, and the C ABI in particular, in the overall computing
landscape. While a lot of folks have put a lot of work into making it
possible to write software without needing to learn the details of
what's happening at the machine level, it's still the case that the
*one* language binding interface that *every* language runtime ends up
including is being able to load and run C libraries.


It's also the case that for any new CPU architecture, one of the first
things people will do is bootstrap a C compiler for it, as that then
lets them bootstrap a whole host of other things (including Python).


For anyone that wants to make the transition from high level
programming to low level programming, or vice-versa, C is also the
common language understood by both software developers and computer
systems engineers.


There *are* some worthy contenders out there that may eventually
topple C's permissive low level memory access model from its position
of dominance (I personally have high hopes for Rust), but that's not
going to be a quick process.


Regards,
Nick.


P.S. It's also worth remembering than many Pythonistas, including
members of the core development team, happily switch between
programming languages according to the task at hand. Python can still
be our *preferred* language without becoming the *only* language we
use :)


--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2017 Grokbase