The Python Paradox
Paul Graham
August 2004
[SNIP]
Hence what, for lack of a better name, I'll call the Python paradox:
if a company chooses to write its software in a comparatively esoteric language, they'll be able to hire better programmers, because they'll
attract only those who cared enough to learn it. And for programmers
the paradox is even more pronounced: the language to learn, if you
want to get a good job, is a language that people don't learn merely
to get a job.
[SNIP]
I wonder what the appropriately esoteric language is today?
I wonder what the appropriately esoteric language is today?
On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 10:37:39PM -0300, Sabrina Almodóvar wrote:
The Python Paradox
Paul Graham
August 2004
[SNIP]
Hence what, for lack of a better name, I'll call the Python paradox:
if a company chooses to write its software in a comparatively
esoteric language, they'll be able to hire better programmers,
because they'll attract only those who cared enough to learn it. And
for programmers the paradox is even more pronounced: the language to
learn, if you want to get a good job, is a language that people
don't learn merely to get a job.
[SNIP]
On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 10:37:39PM -0300, Sabrina Almodóvar wrote:
The Python Paradox
Paul Graham
August 2004
[SNIP]
Hence what, for lack of a better name, I'll call the Python paradox:
if a company chooses to write its software in a comparatively
esoteric language, they'll be able to hire better programmers,
because they'll attract only those who cared enough to learn it. And
for programmers the paradox is even more pronounced: the language to
learn, if you want to get a good job, is a language that people
don't learn merely to get a job.
[SNIP]
I wonder what the appropriately esoteric language is today?
We can sort of think of go/rust as esoteric versions of C/C++. But
what would be the esoteric python?
Perhaps Julia? I don't know of any large software projects happening
in julia world that aren't essentially scientific computing libraries
(but this is because *I* work mostly with scientific computing
libraries and sometimes live under a rock).
- DLD
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 10:37:39PM -0300, Sabrina Almodóvar wrote:
                       The Python Paradox
                          Paul Graham
                          August 2004
[SNIP]
Hence what, for lack of a better name, I'll call the Python paradox:
if a company chooses to write its software in a comparatively
esoteric language, they'll be able to hire better programmers,
because they'll attract only those who cared enough to learn it. And
for programmers the paradox is even more pronounced: the language to
learn, if you want to get a good job, is a language that people don't
learn merely to get a job.
[SNIP]
I don't think that an esoteric language leads to better programmers.
I know really good people that work mostly in assembly which by today standard would be considered "esoteric".
They are really good at their field but they write shitty code in higher languages as python.
That same goes for the other direction: I saw Ruby programmers writing C
code and trust me, it didn't result in good quality code.
I would be more inclined to think that a good programmer is not the one
that knows an esoteric language but the one that can jump from one programming paradigm to another.
And when I say "jump" I mean that he/she can understand the problem to
solve, find the best tech stack to solve it and do it in an efficient
manner using that tech stack correctly.
It is in the "using that tech stack correctly" where some programmers
that "think" they know languages A, B and C get it wrong.
Just writing code that "compiles" and "it does not immediately crash" is
not enough to say that "you are using the tech stack correctly".
The Python Paradox
Paul Graham
August 2004
In a recent talk [1] I said something that upset a lot of people: that
you could get smarter programmers to work on a Python project than you
could to work on a Java project.
I didn't mean by this that Java programmers are dumb. I meant that
Python programmers are smart. It's a lot of work to learn a new
programming language. And people don't learn Python because it will
get them a job; they learn it because they genuinely like to program
and aren't satisfied with the languages they already know.
Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> writes:
Then we're doomed, because Python is appallingly slow. Not even Moore's
law can save us.
Well, then what language do you use for what kind of projects?
BTW: Maybe you are new to this newsgroup? So let me inform
you that if you post to comp.lang.python, sometimes, a computer
set up by a mailing-list person will make a copy of your post and
automatically post it to his Python mailing list, which possibly
also might be published in the Web - all without your consent.
Then we're doomed, because Python is appallingly slow. Not even Moore's
law can save us.
Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> writes:
Then we're doomed, because Python is appallingly slow. Not even Moore's
law can save us.
Well, then what language do you use for what kind of projects?
BTW: Maybe you are new to this newsgroup? So let me inform
you that if you post to comp.lang.python, sometimes, a computer
set up by a mailing-list person will make a copy of your post and
automatically post it to his Python mailing list, which possibly
also might be published in the Web - all without your consent.
Well, then what language do you use for what kind of
projects?
Well, then what language do you use for what kind of
projects?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 33:38:51 |
| Calls: | 10,391 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,064 |
| Messages: | 6,417,129 |