[ffsm8]

> +1. I love golang, because for the most part, there is only 1 way to do something.

Are you aware that you're referencing the Python mantra with that? Feel free to Google it, it's from 2004.

There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.

[JohnBooty]

    the Python mantra with that?

Offtopic but, I switched from Ruby to Python for a new job about six months ago.

While I love Ruby, I was looking forward to some of that "one way to do things" simplicity I'd been promised by Python.

Boy... were my hopes crushed. There are a lot of possible ways to do any given thing, from iteration to package/import structures, etc.

For the most part it seems like the proliferation of options in Python is pretty sane; I can generally see why each choice was made to address existing pain points. So kudos to Python for that. But man, did they leave "one way to do it" behind a loooong time ago.

[ffsm8]

That they did, indeed.

And they honestly never really adhered to it either. It was just a knee-jerk reaction to a (I believe Haskell) presentation that said something like "we got n ways to do x", where n was in the double digits and x was something extremely uninteresting like looping over an array.

Can't really recall details though, it was old knowledge by the time I Heard about it around 2010 and a quick Google didn't help me dig it up