|
|
|
|
|
by xaa
5161 days ago
|
|
I would argue that Python's approach is FAR better than Clojure/Leiningen's "no batteries included" approach. Suppose you want to do a very common task like parse some XML. In Clojure, the workflow is: 1. Go to Github or Clojars, find the latest version number of clojure.data.xml
2. Add this version number to your project.clj
3. Lein deps and restart the repl
4. Re-acquire whatever REPL data you had
In Python, it's: 1. import xml.{sax,dom,etree}
And, paradoxically, the availability of all these different versions of libraries in Clojure leads to MORE conflicts between libraries than would otherwise be the case, not less. In Python, you may not agree that, say, the "os" or "subprocess" modules are optimal -- but by golly, they're consistent. |
|