26

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, neFormal, you wrote: N>> Lua passed. To me here the neighbor in operation tells regularly, than it is better F> do not trust it. F> lua it is good only jit'. Syntactically it is worse js. Here he considers that quality jit it objectively, and syntax and so forth it

27

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, neFormal, you wrote: F> lua it is good only jit'. Syntactically it is worse js. Squirrel - ideological follower LUA where corrected all jambs.

28

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, barn_czn, you wrote: _> Here I see admirers of the Python sit. _> you explain to me, respected, from what boiled water. From it ? _> To me already for 40, much saw and taught. I Can understand still why JS did not sink, I hope it TS finishes. But that _> here such shit like a python suddenly started to climb through in all slots as a script - I  do not understand. _> for clearness - itself from camp.NET.  . Not so clearly against what you are is specific. Against  languages basically (then on what you will suggest to write any scripts of automation or calculations, etc.) or against the Python (then what of  languages you see on its place)?

29

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, barn_czn, you wrote: _> the Python - the ugliness is finite ugliness. Who generally admitted, that programming was not hemorrhoids? It that turns out? Each fool can here and so is simple  algorithm and receive result? And to suffer? Sacred art of programming should not be accessible to those who did not find time to peel the skin to bones and to learn, how much life is heavy and gloomy. How generally so it is possible - to open , to type "2+2" and to receive 4? And how to create the new project,  adjustments, compilation, etc., etc.? The presents  categorically against the such.

30

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, netch80, you wrote: N>>> Lua passed. To me here the neighbor in operation tells regularly, than it is better F>> do not trust it. F>> lua it is good only jit'. Syntactically it is worse js. N> Here he considers that quality jit it objectively, and syntax and so forth it  it is right. But if there is no taste any muck descends. Yes and is easier: there are no choice torments.

31

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, neFormal, you wrote: F> yes and is easier: there are no choice torments. By the way, on it at me learning of the Python is remembered and stopped two times. I think "it would be necessary to study, for the outlook extension", well give what to put, aha, a python 2. and a python 3.? So to study? Like 3 it is necessary, but write that 2  all live and till now it is used very actively, and thus they are various. I start to look, "so to take", and then "yes well " Through . Years I look again - the same. P.S. By the way, what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python?

32

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, barn_czn, you wrote: _> To me already for 40, much saw and taught. I Can understand still why JS did not sink, I hope it TS finishes. Much saw and taught, but and did not learn that JS this subset TS, therefore TS in any way it cannot finish, only make even more popularly.

33

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, fmiracle, you wrote: F> P.S. F> By the way what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python? https://pythonclock.org

34

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, alex_public, you wrote: F>> By the way what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python? _> https://pythonclock.org Thanks. And  will not be suddenly?

35

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, fmiracle, you wrote: F> P.S. F> By the way what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python? python3 there was a nuance earlier that many libraries worked only under 2.7 now with it already easier, much rewrote. For "the outlook extension" suffices.

36

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, chaotic-kotik, you wrote: CK> Much saw and taught, but and did not learn that JS this subset TS, therefore TS in any way it cannot finish, only make even more popularly. Not the subset, and the assembler, i.e. ts is compiled in js.

37

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, Sharov, you wrote: S> Not the subset, and the assembler, i.e. ts is compiled in js. Both a subset and the assembler. Any  the code on JS it  the code on TS.

38

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, fmiracle, you wrote: F>>> By the way what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python? _>> https://pythonclock.org F> Thanks. And  will not be suddenly? In RHEL there will be a support  to 2027. For money (but CentOS c the company it is drawn out informally the same). Ubuntu it is similar to 2023 (at 18.04 LTS). In general, there are no hindrances to patriots (c) for their means.

39

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, chaotic-kotik, you wrote: CK> Both a subset and the assembler. Any  the code on JS it  the code on TS. With the registration of purpose TS in the form of static typification it turns out, to put it mildly, not in its favor TS...

40

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, alex_public, you wrote: F>> P.S. F>> By the way what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python? _> https://pythonclock.org And when 4th make, incompatible with 3rd?

41

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, barn_czn, you wrote: _> Here I see admirers of the Python sit. _> you explain to me, respected, from what boiled water. From it ? From it is exact. To it there were no reasons to appear if Mathworks are not greedy.

42

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, netch80, you wrote: N> With the registration of purpose TS in the form of static typification it turns out, to put it mildly, not in its favor TS... In it just all salt. You take the existing project on JS and you start to add summaries of types gradually. Not mandatory to do it at once. Not mandatory to do it for all code.

43

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, alex_public, you wrote: F>> P.S. F>> By the way what now to study it is necessary to be in a subject of the Python? _> https://pythonclock.org Fake news. RedHat will support 2.7, at least, to 2027.

44

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, Cyberax, you wrote: the C> RedHat will support 2.7, at least, to 2027. What for? What there such incompatibility between 2.7 and 3.0 which cannot be overcome for a year-two? Generally, in what global problems of migration with 2.7 on 3.0? It is really interesting, for not so in a subject? Found,

45

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, Sharov, you wrote: the C>> RedHat will support 2.7, at least, to 2027. S> What for? What there such incompatibility between 2.7 and 3.0 which cannot be overcome for a year-two? The main problems that lines changed on "". As a result it is necessary  all code casually not to mix them with bytes.

46

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, barn_czn, you wrote: _> Here I see admirers of the Python sit. _> you explain to me, respected, from what boiled water. From it ? Instead of you could it as that to visualize that is uncover more widely the term? I here not a forfeit of a python, and judging by a branch of responses of such fans of one and a half navvy on a forum can you not there came with this question?

47

Re: Python - ugliness

F> do not trust it. F> lua it is good only jit'. Syntactically it is worse js. Generally that jit separately from  and itself  it appeared in leaders from for the compact interpreter which it is possible to push even in  and many began it  to themselves as simple but powerful  language

48

Re: Python - ugliness

Hello, andyp, you wrote: A> From it is exact. To it there were no reasons to appear if Mathworks are not greedy. Asyas? At first, language in  full . Secondly, the Python appeared and applied till now far not only to a ruler.

49

Re: Python - ugliness

CK> In it just all salt. You take the existing project on JS and you start to add summaries of types gradually. Not mandatory to do it at once. Not mandatory to do it for all code. Most likely it will be strict on the contrary. Written  the guru the operating code on TS will be given on support to drunks to Hindus, and will acquire JS, for it  on the esthetic side of a question, after all the main thing - fast   and  . The second beginning of thermodynamics a finger you will not knock down.

50

Re: Python - ugliness

ARK> Though occasionally miracles happen, as there "sang" Belan - "I know precisely, impossible is possible". ARK> Couple of months back here  any piece inveterate  which has been some years ago written by me in wild haste and with violation of everything that it is possible to break (and places even what it is impossible). At us such miracles quite often. Idea on a python or in , and the final version on a C ( only on.