Hacker News Reader

Comment by crabbone | Hacker News Reader

I don't see this as an enhancement.

Not pursuing JIT or efficient compilation in general was a deliberate decision way back when Python made some kind of sense. It was the simplicity of implementation valued over performance gains that motivated this decision.

The mantra Python programmers liked to repeat was that "the performance is good enough, and if you want to go fast, write in C and make a native module".

And if you didn't like that, there was always Java.

Today, Python is getting closer and closer to be "the crappy Java with worse syntax". Except we already have that: it's called Groovy.

View on HN

What are you talking about? From what I can read here there is no syntax change. Just a framework for faster execution. Plus, Python's usecase has HEAVILY evolved over the last few years since it's now the defacto language for machine learning. It's great that the core devs are keeping up with the time.

The language is definitely getting more complex syntactically, and I'm not a huge fan of some of those changes but it's no where near Java or C++ or anything else. You can still write simple Python with all of these changes.

> What are you talking about?

Read it again. It seems you were reading too fast. I'm talking about the future, not the change being discussed right now.

> It's great that the core devs are keeping up with the time.

You mistake the influence of Microsoft and their desire to sell features for progress. Python is actually regressing as a system. It's becoming worse, not better. But it's hard to see the gestalt of it if all you are looking for is the new features.

> it's no where near Java

That is true. Java is a much more simple and regular (not in the automata theory sense) language. Today, if you want a simpler language, you need to choose Java over Python (although neither is very simple, so, preferably, you need a third option).

> You can still write simple Python

I can also write simple C++ if I limit what I use from the language to a very small subset. This says nothing about the simplicity of the language...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com