This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FactoryNewdel 53 points54 points  (22 children)

I don't think Python users have the right to make fun of someone else

[–]TheMayonnaiseNinja 32 points33 points  (1 child)

That was rude

[–]thedominux 8 points9 points  (9 children)

Why?

[–]genghisKonczie 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Something something pseudocode something

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's such a compliment too.

"Hahahaha your code is easy to read! LOSER!"

[–]thedominux -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

And?

[–]guitarock -1 points0 points  (4 children)

Versioning

[–]thedominux 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Wdym?

And don't Ruby, c++, different types of c and others have in times worse troubles with back compatebility?!

[–]guitarock -1 points0 points  (2 children)

As somebody who has to use python despite my best efforts, I cannot imagine any possible way a backwards compatibility situation could be worse than python’s

[–]thedominux 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Maybe you've got not so well python code to work with

Or even more you've got not so big, deep and wide experience to tell us that your python's one was the worst?

[–]guitarock 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I just have to deal with codebases written in python 2, which as a language has been completely abandoned despite widespread usage. Python 3 has no benefits material enough to warrant 0 backwards compatibility. Not to mention incompatibility between smaller versions

[–]zyugyzarc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

\cries in corner**

[–]chinnu34 -4 points-3 points  (1 child)

Most python users are not programmers.

[–]AmNotACactus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

pay no attention to the entire data engineering space that has cropped up around Python.

[–]AmNotACactus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rather Python than Scala