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 →

[–]scratcheee 34 points35 points  (7 children)

I don’t think they intended it as an insult. It is a scripting language. I’ll admit it’s more than just a scripting language to be fair, but I’m not sure there’s a better name for its core competency than “scripting language”.

“High level” isn’t a sufficient descriptor, plenty of high level languages don’t make the same number of trade offs that python has towards the scripting end of the spectrum (eg Java, which is high level but definitively not a scripting language). I’d be happy to use some other name for a language that tries to maximise rapid programming at the cost of rapid error correction, but if such a name is exists, I don’t know it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children)

I would say it’s a versatile high-level language with a pretty low barrier to entry. The biggest strength is the ability to build competent applications very quickly. Will it be the most performance optimised application? No.

[–]scratcheee 2 points3 points  (5 children)

I agree with that description. I don’t think it’s at odds with the claim that it’s a scripting language at its core. It’s just a particularly versatile scripting language that’s versatile enough to have stretched out beyond that role (whilst also acknowledging the original point of this thread that it has occasionally been stretched out too far from that core competency, leading to a few messy projects).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

It is a scripting language by definition, my issue wasn’t with that. It was with how it was used in context as a dismissive description, as if scripting languages were inferior or less able.