Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python

[Enrico Colombini <erix@...>]

On 04-Feb-20 00:46, Sean Conner wrote:
>    I then remembered programming in BASIC as a kid, where I would have to
> deal with code that looked like:
>
> 	0 'CODE TAKEN FROM THE RAINBOW M
> 	AGAZINE, VOL. IV, NO. 1 (AUGUST
> 	1984), PAGE 78-'SOPWITH COCO' FL
> 	IES AGAIN!
> 	1700 X=30+SIN(JB)*28:Y=160-COS(J
> 	B)*28:CIRCLE(FA,FB),1,0:CIRCLE(X
> 	,Y),1,1:FA=X:FB=Y:RETURN
>  [snip]
>
> (the limits of 32K RAM and a 32 column screen).  I even went on (again, as
> a kid) to learn assembly langauge (for multiple machines even!).

Fond memories :-)
(I actually started with RPN on HP calculators, then pencil-assembling 
and hand-typing hex code on a KIM-1, then learned BASIC. Yes, I'm a 
dinosaur)
>    What does this mean for Lua?  I don't know.  The trends I do see is that
> the more opinionated a tool set is (Go---there's only one way to format the
> code; Python---there's only one way to to things) the more popular (because
> programmers don't have to think.  The more batteries are available, the less
> code that has to be written, the less a programmer has to think, the better.
> The more popular a language is, the less chance of being fired over using
> it, the better (no one ever got fired for buying IBM, or Microsoft).

I think you are right. It could be down to limited time, limited 
attention span, desire/need to see results immediately, lower 
concentration required, plain laziness...
Not the world I'd prefer if I had a choice, but it is the one we live in.

Basically, the larger the user space you wish for, the dumbest (in a 
broad sense) the language and its environment have to be, at least on 
the surface.

>    So alternatively, a language has to be useful, but not require thinking
> and very popular.  Kind of explains JavaScript in a way ...

Well, Javascript lives in a different environment where it could do 
worse, especially in the latest version. On the other hand, most Web 
programmers write trivial code but use opaque libraries / frameworks 
they have no control over.

>    -spc (Thining of bowing out of the whole batteries thang for Lua---it's
> 	just not worth the effort because of laziness on the part of
> 	everybody else ... )

Uh... your honor, I plead guilty here.
That's one of the reasons I think a small-steps policy would be easier 
to pursue.

--
  Enrico