[sseagull]

But the common argument against C++ is that you need to know a large portion of the language because someone somewhere might be using it, and you may have to read and understand their code. So even things that are optional in python should count against python, just like they do in C++.

[masklinn]

The difference is that C++ features very much interact with one another in subtle and detrimental ways, so if you are using feature A and a codebase you leverage uses feature B, the interaction of the two can genuinely cause issues. For Python, the extension points are generally hooks into very explicit operations (and some of the symbols you list aren't even extension points).

Hell, the very defaults of C++ will interact badly with other features and proceed to shoot you in the foot, as Chrome somewhat recently reminded us (https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/16...).

You need an 8x6 matrix just to know what the compiler will or won't generate (https://i.stack.imgur.com/b2VBV.png) and then you need to know exactly what the defaults will do and whether that breaks your object entirely and you need to override those defaults.

[sseagull]

Oh I completely agree. I am mostly just annoyed at the slanted comparisons, saying that something like Python is ”simple” on some absolute scale.

I teach Python to scientific programmers. There are a lot of little details and corners that aren’t as obvious to experienced developers. Just like any language.

[masklinn]

Nobody in the thread said that Python is simple though, only that it's nowhere near the complexity of C++.

[morelisp]

There is a big difference between "optional because I don't need do to the thing in 99% of projects" and "optional because I can use one of three alternate features with subtle incompatibilities to do the thing."