Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

15 years of Python here, started in 2.4. Day to day Python is not more complicated to use. It's actually easier due to many bugs fixes, quality of life features and better error messages.

However, Python does provide more tools to do more complicated things (async, type hints, etc), but that's not what most people use. They actually don't even know about it, and don't have to care. So it's not the questions you see on SO.

Python has gotten much, MUCH more popular, and we are currently facing a wave of new beginners. Particularly from schools (it's now the default teaching language in most countries) and from loads of workers that can benefit from manipulating data with programming and are attracted to Python for this.

It is precisely because Python is still easy that it's that popular: it doesn't benefit from massive existing code bases like Java or accidental monopoly like JS. We just have a lot of people creating a lot of libs for pretty much everything, because everybody can do it.

I also think the aesthetic of the language plays a big role. Python has been designed to allow you to dev with it with just MS notepad if you have to. It means you don't need to learn about a gigantic and complicated ecosystem to be productive with it (although it does exist): it's a huge help for all those people that are just getting started or not a programmer at heart. It's also harder to create very ugly code because you don't know what you are doing, and if you do, the result will not be as bad as with other languages because Guido made sure of it.

It's also why you don't get multi-line lambdas. Everything is a compromise.




I mostly agree with you, but still think that Python could be way simpler and equally powerful. I'd love to see a language similar to Python, but with named structs instead of classes, for instance.


Ooooh that's an interesting idea.

That is one thing about Python that has always been interesting. For new programmers, it's such an attractive language because it's very simple to get up to speed and pump out usable code.

But to really start leveraging Python for more serious projects it's extremely useful to use Classes. And that's actually an appreciable bump in difficulty for inexperienced devs. I've seen go to great lengths to avoid it.

Maybe named structs would be a simpler way for them to level up complexity, especially if they're coming from a C background.


@dataclasses?


People have not caught up with 3.5+ yet. I see plenty of code not using f-strings, chainmaps, pools and the likes.

We can't expect them to known about dataclasses yet.


>It's also why you don't get multi-line lambdas. Everything is a compromise.

Arguably too much of a compromise. This is just Guido doing a "because I say so" and imposing his bias against functional programming. Give me a properly-designed language like Ruby any day over Python's bag of compromises.


On the other hand, as someone who reads other peoples code just as my as I write my own, maybe by the time your lambda is many lines it should have its own name. And maybe the name should be really informative about what the function does.


And yet Ruby never took off outside of RoR and is dying. Lisp and Haskell are still niche languages.

So somehow, languages promoting big chunks of anonymous code never win never win the public heart.

In fact, when you are force by an accidental monopoly to use ine, you get js. What do people do in JS ? Multline lambda are mapped to property names or replaced with await. Registries are used in every framework. We spent 2 decades fixing JS to use as little callback hell as possible.




Applications are open for YC Summer 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: