Slashdot Mirror


The Python Paradox, by Paul Graham

GnuVince writes "Paul Graham has posted a new article to his website that he called "The Python Paradox" which refines the statements he made in "Great Hackers" about Python programmers being better hackers than Java programmers. He basically says that since Python is not the kind of language that lands you a job like Java, those who learn it seek more than simply financial benefits, they seek better tools. Very interesting read."

22 of 726 comments (clear)

  1. FP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    System.out.println("First Post");

  2. Shame. by Draconix · · Score: 2, Funny

    Python is not the kind of language that lands you a job like Java

    Because otherwise, the business world would be that much less bass-ackwards.

    --
    By reading this you acknowledge that you have read it.
  3. I am positive... by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...a civil discussion will ensue.

    --
    Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    1. Re:I am positive... by dasmegabyte · · Score: 4, Funny
      Well, sure. What do you expect when we have a guy claiming not only that one language is better than another but also that it is better because the others because the users aren't greedy?I wonder how else we can pad programmer's egos based on completely subjective hypothesis on language choice?
      • Perl users have more dense social lives.
      • Ruby users have big, full beards chicks love to run their hands through.
      • VB users have sensible shoes and drive Toyotas.
      • C++ users enjoy a good mystery now and then.
      • PHP users probably own one or more Dremel multitools.
      • Javascripters are full of little trivia snippets and are great fun at parties.
      • Cold Fusion users are kind of quiet but have very deep thoughts.
      • SQL programmers have annoying laughs but are otherwise okay guys

      Oh, and C# users have bigger dicks. But that can be proven empirically.
      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  4. Re:nonsense... by NSash · · Score: 3, Funny

    I will bask in the irrelevance of your glorious, insightful comment.

    (Come back when you RTFA, or even RTF-summary, ya hear?)

  5. That's all well and good... by lobsterGun · · Score: 4, Funny


    I''ll be willing to buy his theory that python hackers are better than java hackers... ..so long as he buys my theory that lisp hackers are better than python hackers.

  6. Re:The way source code looks by geniusj · · Score: 3, Funny

    I love you, Ruby!

  7. Re:Yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I strongly suspect no routine/application exists which is "best" accomplished in brainfuck.

  8. Confused by Ranx · · Score: 3, Funny

    First we hear is't a huge disadvantage when a programmer doesn't know the business-side of software development. And now it's the other way around.

    I'm confused.

    --

    Me
  9. Re:Yea by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Funny

    If a design goal was "any attempt to reverse engineer the source will drive the person attempting to do so completely insane", then perhaps.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  10. Re:Yea by Mateito · · Score: 4, Funny

    Except, when I call you into a "meet the client and wear a suit... okay, a tie then? Ok.. but at least put some shoes on" meeting, please please please don't tell them you've written their application in "brainfuck".

    (No, haven't had the experience, but I'm waiting for it)

  11. Re:The way source code looks by Evangelion · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey if you want readability, Perl has 'em all beat:

    for(keys %{$hr}){$hr{$_}->s($x);}

  12. Re:Yea by brunson · · Score: 3, Funny

    Perl is the vice grips of the programming world. Sure it'll do the job, but there's usually a better tool for it.

    --
    09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    Jesus loves you, I think you suck
  13. Re:Yea by JPelorat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nearly all female subroutines appear to be written in it.

    --
    Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
  14. Re:Not true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    and all but one of those millionaires came from
    the 255 people


    of course...that last one was the broadcast person.

  15. Re:Python doesn't land you a better job by osobear · · Score: 2, Funny

    ahhh, Slashdot, the place where "Oh, bullshit" is an insightful comment.

  16. Hm. by cbiffle · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, following this hypothesis, the tools for the Brainfuck programming language should be best of all? I've -never- seen a BF job posting.

  17. Now he has pissed off *everybody* by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Funny
    First, Java programmers weren't as smart as Python programmers.

    Now, Python is "esoteric." Esoteric?!? Them's fightin' words! Python is for everybody, and one of the easiest languages to learn.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  18. Re:Why I like Python by aled · · Score: 1, Funny

    Syntactic sugar makes code fat.

    --

    "I think this line is mostly filler"
  19. If She Weighs the Same as a Duck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Then she's made of wood....

    ok, not quite a paradox, but a Python logicism nonetheless.

    "There, I've run circles round you, logically" - John Cleese, the penguin on the television sketch

  20. Re:He likes Small Is Better, which isn't Java by indigeek · · Score: 3, Funny

    You missed the fact that Richard Stallman has proven that a full operating system can be written in lisp. He even attained sainthood for it.
    Too bad he never managed to write a good editor for it.

  21. Re:Why I like Python by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah...umm...when Paul was talking about great programmers liking Python...he...ummm...wasn't talking about you.