URL: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=7282&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

This is an article about a group of developers who had a task to do but hadn't chosen what programming language to use. The alternatives they had to choose from were C, PHP, Perl, Java and Python; and the requirements where these:

  • We planned to prototype on a remote device and anticipated numerous changes. We needed a language that was designed with change in mind.
  • We wanted to avoid the added step of code compilation in order to minimize the overhead associated with a change. An interpreted language seemed pragmatic.
  • We wanted a language with good introspection capability.
  • We needed to do a lot of string manipulation and file I/O. Whatever language we chose had to excel in both of these areas.

It's so suited for Python that it almost sounds as if they wrote the requirements after the choice. But that's just how Python is.

Comments

Your email will never ever be published.

Previous:
Moscow Metro December 1, 2003 Misc. links
Next:
Mr. Picassohead December 3, 2003 Misc. links
Related by category:
How I run standalone Python in 2025 January 14, 2025 Python
get in JavaScript is the same as property in Python February 13, 2025 Python
How to resolve a git conflict in poetry.lock February 7, 2020 Python
Best practice with retries with requests April 19, 2017 Python
Related by keyword:
Integer division in programming languages August 4, 2004 Python
Django vs. Java October 25, 2008 Django
Zope compared to PHP June 22, 2005 Zope
Vista voice recognition and Perl February 9, 2007 Misc. links