* I’ve been using it for a long time
* I have lots of friends that use it
* Even though I’m interested in other languages I don’t have time to learn them
These are all perfectly valid reasons! But, they say very little about Python.
> Most criticisms I see leveled at Python are still completely unfounded. Many times the criticism can be addressed by using the language in a different way.
Is that true? Functional programming missing, slow, poor module system and REPL, weird scoping, environment and distribution issues, the nightmare that was 2.x to 3.x, tacking on features a la C++, etc.
> So be it; if I’m not working in one of those areas, then Python is still probably the best fit for me. I used to hear that Python wasn’t the best at any one thing, but it was second best at most things. I agreed with that line of reasoning for a long time, but these days Python is as good as any of its peers for many things, and it’s still quite effective in many areas where it might not objectively be the “best” fit.
This is just weird, especially if one doesn't know or use other modern languages. F#, Rust, Elixir, Ruby, Racket, OCaml, etc.
In my opinion, unless Python is being used for scripting, machine learning, or scientific programming, then it's the wrong tool. And I think other languages can even compete with the scripting and scientific programming aspects.
Racket had a moment a few years ago where it looked like it might take off. That ship sailed. It’s the ruby problem with extra steps.
I suspect they mean that Rails gave Ruby its 15 mins. (and why the lucky stiff!) I, personally have no issues with Ruby (I was a very early adopter coming from Perl, C, C++, Python), but find it to be "Python with extra steps" more or less.
But I was mainly listing languages that one should probably look into before claiming Python is a “best fit”.
I also would like to know what the Ruby problem is? Is it referencing meta-programming?
I'm not a fan of the new project, since it means the core team is less focused on Racket than they otherwise would be. But, it's their life.
I've heard people echo the "Python is the second-best language for anything" sentiment a lot. A bit broad and a touch pithy, but over all I'm inclined to agree. It's a language clearly (and explicitly, as said by Guido) designed to be readable, and I think that more than anything else is why I have a case of the warm fuzzies for it. Compare even a small thing, like f strings in Python vs string interpolation in JS -- f strings are simply less noisy and therefore easier to read. Decorators, when used well, make it a fantastic language with which to write libraries that a user can grok quickly. Etc.
If I could design my perfect language, it would be Python, just with clear variable declarations via a keyword such as `var`, optional true static typing and consts, and better tooling -- though, I have to say, after diving in and really learning the ins and outs of venv, poetry, all that stuff, the "Python's tooling is a disaster" meme is IMO a touch overblown; I felt that way as well at one point and in hindsight it was due to me feeling overwhelmed, as opposed to any objective evaluation of the tooling; that said, there is definitely room for improvement.
I myself am incredibly interested in properly learning C++, Rust, Go, and improving my JS skills, but overall it never quite feels like the juice is worth the squeeze, because Python really does just feel like "the second best language for anything." And since my interests are pretty wide -- everything from web dev to scripting to desktop apps to audio (well, Python is perhaps the worst language there), most of the time it just seems more practical to figure out a way to do the thing I want to do in Python, especially because there's usually a library for it already. That said, I'm a solo developer at a non-tech-related-industry job, so I'm not rubbing up against many of the same frictions I see discussed so often here on HN.
As I said, though, I'm still pretty green and am aware that I know just enough to be dangerous, so I'm very open to hear why anyone disagrees with this viewpoint.
I highly recommend taking a look at F#. It is functional first, but it is multi paradigm in that it supports imperative and OOP programming just as well. You can write code in F# effectively how you’d write code in Python, if you’d like. F# is indentation sensitive, has sane scoping, the dotnet CLI tooling, modules, pattern matching, easy and regular async, scripting, notebooks, static typing with type inference (meaning you don’t need to type annotate everything), etc.
I would argue that of everything Python does, F# does it better and more. So if we accept that Python is the second best language at everything, then F# becomes a rather interesting language to consider.
Also, after I wrote the above comment, I checked out Nim, and it in many ways is exactly what I was describing. And Cython as well, even for all its (thankfully continuously reducing) weirdness.
* It's preinstalled on my favorite OS
But seriously. I like how fast I can start getting results with it. Sometimes I don't even need to create a file, I simply do "python3 -c ..." or use it as an interactive shell