[mywittyname]

Why are you miffed about it? I legitimately hate reading golang with passion and find python to be pretty intuitive, outside of the odd ambitious list comprehensions. I worked in a golang shop for several years, so it's not just an familiarity situation either.

We are just different. That's not something to be mad about.

[Yokohiii]

In my opinion most interpreted languages today tend to produce very dense code. Fancy call chains and closures interleaving. If you look for a subtle bug those are hard to reason about, you have to know the details of a lot of different APIs.

Go is verbose partly for that reason, but a silly loop is a silly loop. The constraints are clear, you only have to do the logic.

[__loam]

[flagged]

[wiseowise]

> Python is a garbage language. Dynamic types are a disaster

Python has gradual type system.

[lijok]

We should all go back to writing assembly

[__loam]

No we should write one of the many modern programming languages that handle certain projects way better, including kotlin, go, or Java. The only things python is best in class at are scripting and as a harness for high performance c++ or fortran.

[lijok]

What about the projects that python handles better?

[__loam]

I mentioned those explicitly. People are still using it as a backend language for projects like huge SaaS deployments though, with the hypothesis being that dev time is expensive. With modern languages like kotlin and go, I think that gap is much too narrow to justify using a slow and badly designed language with good syntax.

[3836293648]

> X is a terrible language because of the lack of static analysis available.

> (Mocking) Yes, that's why we should go back to Y with even worse static analysis.

Sure