[Glastonbury] Python [WAS: Another company recognizes Liux is HERE!]

[Martin WHEELER]

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Tim Hall wrote:

> One of my main reasons for migrating to Linux was to learn programming.

Well, it's as good a platform as any -- and you get to play with any
language you want (as long as it's not Microsoft-restricted).

My main reason for migrating to Linux was because I wanted my own http
server; and I didn't want to pay the earth for it.
Only later did the full philosophical implications of free/open models
of creative co-operation take precedence over all else.

> On Monday 23 June 2003 23:13, Maurice Onmaplate wrote:
> > How can you say a language that relies upon
> > indentation as part of the syntax "is a very friendly
> > programming language"? =A0
>
> Try it and see.

No, thanks.  I have too many tools that automatically strip out white
space from code files for me not to screw up really badly without
meaning to at some time on this one.
(That doesn't mean to say I don't appreciate the design thought behind
it.  It's just not for me, though.)

> It is IMHO far and away the most user-friendly programming language

Aaargh - aargh -- Tim!  You're beginning to remind me of the middle-aged
lady I met at a MUSE (Microcomputer Users in Secondary Education)
conference some 20+ years ago -- who was loudly telling everyone in
earshot that it was *criminal* for BASIC to be taught in UK schools, and
everyone should be compelled by law to teach young minds LOGO.
The evangelical stance was appalling.  (Particularly when she added that
6 months previously she hadn't known what a computer was -- she was one
of those re-cycled Latin teachers in vogue at that time.)  That was my
one and only attempt ever to become involved with IT in the secondary
sector.  (I've been 40 years in HFE.)

>  the absurdities of the individual
> language's syntax.

Ummm.  You think people design languages from random start parameters?
Not maybe to resolve specific expression problems?

> By comparison C++ is simple, but surely, unless you're writing applicatio=
ns
> that need speed and tight memory management it's unnecessary isn't it?

<sob.  So must assembler be, then.>

> If I had my way I'd use Python for everything, but it does require having=
 an
> interpreter available, so it looks like I'll be learning PHP too. I'm try=
ing
> to avoid perl for reasons of being bad at punctuation and Java too for mo=
re
> intuitive reasons although I do like the Object Oriented-ness of it.

Tim, have you thought about the *nature* of the various problems you
might be using any particular language to solve?  Real-time fast
manipulation of physical hardware (Forth?); boringly repetitious
execution of stupid scientific formulae (Fortran?); natural language
recursiveness and redundancy (Lisp?)  And what if you want to deal with
rapidly changing/evolving Markov chains in a neural network?
Hmmm?

As usual, it's horses for courses -- or: Choose your algorithm before
choosing your language.
(Steve is actually probably better off with xbase++ than many a
high-level language, for the specific problems he has to solve.)

> At some future point I will probably want to
> teach my son programming and I'm wondering what language to start him off=
 on

Try Urdu, or full Hindi -- that's where the work is moving these days :)

Cheers,
--=20
Martin Wheeler   -   StarTEXT / AVALONIX - Glastonbury - BA6 9PH - England
mwheeler@startext.co.uk                http://www.startext.co.uk/mwheeler/
GPG pub key : 01269BEB  6CAD BFFB DB11 653E B1B7 C62B  AC93 0ED8 0126 9BEB
      - Share your knowledge. It's a way of achieving immortality. -