Decline and fall of scripting languages ?

Discussion in 'Python' started by Kay Schluehr, Aug 6, 2005.

  1. Kay Schluehr

    Kay Schluehr Guest

    Kay Schluehr, Aug 6, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Kay Schluehr

    Paddy Guest

    Do you know anyone who has dropped LAMP for a proprietary Web solution?
    Or vice versa?
    Know any sys-admins that have dropped their use of scripting languages
    for something else?
    What are the alternatives that are supposedly driving scripting
    languages out?

    - I'm unconvinced.
     
    Paddy, Aug 6, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Reinhold Birkenfeld, Aug 6, 2005
    #3
  4. Kay Schluehr

    Cliff Wells Guest

    On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 03:24 -0700, Kay Schluehr wrote:
    > No good news for scripting-language fans:
    >
    > http://www.phpmag.net/itr/news/psecom,id,23284,nodeid,113.html


    It didn't say what they left PHP, Perl and Python for (if you are to
    even believe their findings).

    PHP has been losing programmers in droves... to Ruby on Rails, but I'm
    not sure how that is bad news for scripting-language fans.

    Commercially funded studies are completely untrustworthy. I've seen
    contradictory studies published within months of each other by the same
    research firms - it was more indicative of a change in clientelle than
    anything else.

    Cliff

    --

    http://www.develix.com :: Web applications and hosting :: Linux, PostgreSQL and Python specialists ::
     
    Cliff Wells, Aug 6, 2005
    #4
  5. Kay Schluehr

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Cliff Wells <> writes:
    > It didn't say what they left PHP, Perl and Python for (if you are to
    > even believe their findings).
    >
    > PHP has been losing programmers in droves... to Ruby on Rails, but I'm
    > not sure how that is bad news for scripting-language fans.


    That's the second time in one or two days that I've heard Ruby on
    Rails mentioned. Can anyone here post a paragraph or two description?
    I sort of know what Ruby is, a very OOP-ified Perl-resemblant
    language, that's also implemented only as an interpreter. I can't see
    punting Python for it.

    Lately I'm interested in OCAML as a possible step up from Python. It
    has bogosity of its own (much of it syntactic) but it has static
    typing and a serious compiler, from what I understand. I don't think
    I can grok it from just reading the online tutorial; I'm going to have
    to code something in it, once I get a block of time available. Any
    thoughts?
     
    Paul Rubin, Aug 7, 2005
    #5
  6. Paul Rubin wrote:

    >Cliff Wells <> writes:
    >
    >
    >>It didn't say what they left PHP, Perl and Python for (if you are to
    >>even believe their findings).
    >>
    >>PHP has been losing programmers in droves... to Ruby on Rails, but I'm
    >>not sure how that is bad news for scripting-language fans.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >That's the second time in one or two days that I've heard Ruby on
    >Rails mentioned. Can anyone here post a paragraph or two description?
    >I sort of know what Ruby is, a very OOP-ified Perl-resemblant
    >language, that's also implemented only as an interpreter. I can't see
    >punting Python for it.
    >
    >

    www.google.com
     
    Joseph Garvin, Aug 7, 2005
    #6
  7. Kay Schluehr

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Joseph Garvin <> writes:
    > >That's the second time in one or two days that I've heard Ruby on
    > >Rails mentioned. Can anyone here post a paragraph or two description?
    > >I sort of know what Ruby is, a very OOP-ified Perl-resemblant
    > >language, that's also implemented only as an interpreter. I can't see
    > >punting Python for it.
    > >

    > www.google.com


    Thanks but I wanted a more Pythonic point of view.
     
    Paul Rubin, Aug 7, 2005
    #7
  8. Kay Schluehr

    Robert Kern Guest

    Paul Rubin wrote:
    > Joseph Garvin <> writes:
    >
    >>>That's the second time in one or two days that I've heard Ruby on
    >>>Rails mentioned. Can anyone here post a paragraph or two description?
    >>>I sort of know what Ruby is, a very OOP-ified Perl-resemblant
    >>>language, that's also implemented only as an interpreter. I can't see
    >>>punting Python for it.

    >>
    >>www.google.com

    >
    > Thanks but I wanted a more Pythonic point of view.


    google('"ruby on rails" python')

    Plenty of Pythonistas posting paragraphs pontificating on the Pythonic
    perspective.

    --
    Robert Kern


    "In the fields of hell where the grass grows high
    Are the graves of dreams allowed to die."
    -- Richard Harter
     
    Robert Kern, Aug 7, 2005
    #8
  9. Kay Schluehr

    Kay Schluehr Guest

    Paul Rubin wrote:
    > Cliff Wells <> writes:
    > > It didn't say what they left PHP, Perl and Python for (if you are to
    > > even believe their findings).
    > >
    > > PHP has been losing programmers in droves... to Ruby on Rails, but I'm
    > > not sure how that is bad news for scripting-language fans.

    >
    > That's the second time in one or two days that I've heard Ruby on
    > Rails mentioned. Can anyone here post a paragraph or two description?
    > I sort of know what Ruby is, a very OOP-ified Perl-resemblant
    > language, that's also implemented only as an interpreter. I can't see
    > punting Python for it.


    Exacly. While Pythons main attitude is reducing clutter and redundant
    design while staying within an OO mindframe, Ruby reintroduces perlish
    clutter. Ruby was mentioned to be a more clean OO language than Python
    in times where Python didn't support inheritance from builtins.
    Nowadays anonymus blocks are the single most discriminative feature
    Ruby is praised for. Therefore Ruby seems to be more modern than Python
    to some people allthough it's design concept is reactionary - or
    "postmodern" what may be the same in post-postmodern times ;-)

    > Lately I'm interested in OCAML as a possible step up from Python. It
    > has bogosity of its own (much of it syntactic) but it has static
    > typing and a serious compiler, from what I understand. I don't think
    > I can grok it from just reading the online tutorial; I'm going to have
    > to code something in it, once I get a block of time available. Any
    > thoughts?


    The whole ML family ( including OCaml ) and languages like Haskell
    based on a Hindley-Milnor type system clearly make a difference. I
    would say that those languages are also cutting edge in language theory
    research. It should be definitely interesting to you. Since there is no
    single language implementation you might also find one that supports
    concepts you need most e.g. concurrency:

    http://cml.cs.uchicago.edu/

    Regards,
    Kay
     
    Kay Schluehr, Aug 7, 2005
    #9
  10. Kay Schluehr

    Paul Rubin Guest

    "Kay Schluehr" <> writes:
    > The whole ML family ( including OCaml ) and languages like Haskell
    > based on a Hindley-Milnor type system clearly make a difference. I
    > would say that those languages are also cutting edge in language theory
    > research. It should be definitely interesting to you. Since there is no
    > single language implementation you might also find one that supports
    > concepts you need most e.g. concurrency:
    >
    > http://cml.cs.uchicago.edu/


    Thanks. That link doesn't work right now but I'll try again later.

    I wonder why the ML's didn't just dispense with the syntax nonsense
    and present themselves unabashedly as statically typed Lisp dialects
    complete with parentheses.

    For concurrency, Oz looks neat, but probably doomed to Python-like
    slow performance (at least the shootout benchmarks have been pretty
    poor). I find it easier to understand than ML though I haven't coded
    anything in it either. I wonder if using logic variables for
    inter-thread communication without careful conventions can lead to
    total spaghetti.

    I also want to check out Erlang and Occam, in my copious free time.
     
    Paul Rubin, Aug 7, 2005
    #10
  11. Kay Schluehr

    gene tani Guest

  12. Kay Schluehr

    Paul Rubin Guest

    "gene tani" <> writes:
    > http://martinfowler.com/bliki/CollectionClosureMethod.html
    > http://onestepback.org/index.cgi/Tech/Ruby/PythonAndRuby.rdoc


    Thanks, the way Ruby passes closure arguments to various of its
    library builtins is cute. PEP 343 adds something sort of comparable
    to Python but I think more library support and culture evolution will
    be needed before the "with" statement operates as smoothly.

    Ruby just doesn't interest me that much though (maybe I'm missing
    something). I was hoping for a concise explanation of what Rails does
    and whether it's feasible to do something like it in (say) Python. I
    did look at the rubyonrails.com site but there were too many marketing
    buzzwords and downloadable videos for me to deal with.
     
    Paul Rubin, Aug 7, 2005
    #12
  13. Kay Schluehr

    c d saunter Guest

    c d saunter, Aug 7, 2005
    #13
  14. Kay Schluehr

    phil Guest


    > Kay Schluehr () wrote:
    > : No good news for scripting-language fans:
    >
    > : http://www.phpmag.net/itr/news/psecom,id,23284,nodeid,113.html
    >


    What incredible horse dooey.

    The only thing that NEVER "penetrates the enterprise space"
    is good sense.

    Does anyone read history books? There is no such thing as a large
    corporation that is not doomed. There are a few names which are
    older than 1/2 a century but the companies and players are
    unrecognizable. We have barbeque joints in Texas older than IBM.
    And noone from 1970 would recognize IBM.
    The "enterprise" is good for one thing. Devouring each other.

    The "enterprise"'s opinion about what is good for the future
    is like this broker I knew in Dallas. All you had to do was
    find out which stock he was recommending, then short it.
     
    phil, Aug 7, 2005
    #14
  15. Kay Schluehr

    Donn Cave Guest

    Quoth "Kay Schluehr" <>:
    | Paul Rubin wrote:
    [ ... re where to go from Python ]
    |> Lately I'm interested in OCAML as a possible step up from Python. It
    |> has bogosity of its own (much of it syntactic) but it has static
    |> typing and a serious compiler, from what I understand. I don't think
    |> I can grok it from just reading the online tutorial; I'm going to have
    |> to code something in it, once I get a block of time available. Any
    |> thoughts?
    |
    | The whole ML family ( including OCaml ) and languages like Haskell
    | based on a Hindley-Milnor type system clearly make a difference. I
    | would say that those languages are also cutting edge in language theory
    | research. It should be definitely interesting to you. Since there is no
    | single language implementation you might also find one that supports
    | concepts you need most e.g. concurrency:
    |
    | http://cml.cs.uchicago.edu/

    My vote would be Haskell first, then other functional languages.
    Learning FP with Objective CAML is like learning to swim in a
    wading pool -- you won't drown, but there's a good chance you
    won't really learn to swim either. Has an interesting, very
    rigorous OOP model though.

    Donn Cave,
     
    Donn Cave, Aug 8, 2005
    #15
  16. Kay Schluehr

    gene tani Guest

    gene tani, Aug 8, 2005
    #16
  17. Kay Schluehr

    Paul Rubin Guest

    "Donn Cave" <> writes:
    > My vote would be Haskell first, then other functional languages.
    > Learning FP with Objective CAML is like learning to swim in a
    > wading pool -- you won't drown, but there's a good chance you
    > won't really learn to swim either. Has an interesting, very
    > rigorous OOP model though.


    I'm not sure what you mean by that about OCAML. That its functional
    model is not pure enough? I'd like to look at Haskell as well, but I
    have the impression that its implementation is not as serious as
    OCaml's, i.e. no native-code compiler.
     
    Paul Rubin, Aug 8, 2005
    #17
  18. Kay Schluehr

    Neil Benn Guest

    phil wrote:

    >>Kay Schluehr () wrote:
    >>: No good news for scripting-language fans:
    >>
    >>: http://www.phpmag.net/itr/news/psecom,id,23284,nodeid,113.html
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >What incredible horse dooey.
    >
    >The only thing that NEVER "penetrates the enterprise space"
    >is good sense.
    >
    >Does anyone read history books? There is no such thing as a large
    >corporation that is not doomed. There are a few names which are
    >older than 1/2 a century but the companies and players are
    >unrecognizable. We have barbeque joints in Texas older than IBM.
    >And noone from 1970 would recognize IBM.
    >The "enterprise" is good for one thing. Devouring each other.
    >
    >The "enterprise"'s opinion about what is good for the future
    >is like this broker I knew in Dallas. All you had to do was
    >find out which stock he was recommending, then short it.
    >
    >
    >

    <snip>
    Err, that's not what is meant by enterprise, it's a catch all term for
    large distributed systems, take a look at the link below for an idea of
    this:

    http://java.sun.com/j2ee/faq.html

    Obviously there are other variations on this than the Sun stuff but
    enterprise dosn't mean 'very large companies' in this case.

    Cheers,

    Neil

    --

    Neil Benn
    Senior Automation Engineer
    Cenix BioScience
    BioInnovations Zentrum
    Tatzberg 47
    D-01307
    Dresden
    Germany

    Tel : +49 (0)351 4173 154
    e-mail :
    Cenix Website : http://www.cenix-bioscience.com
     
    Neil Benn, Aug 8, 2005
    #18
  19. Kay Schluehr

    Dave Brueck Guest

    Paul Rubin wrote:
    > Ruby just doesn't interest me that much though (maybe I'm missing
    > something).


    I don't think you are. My impression is that if you've never used Python or
    Ruby, you'll generally end up liking whichever of the two you really discover
    first (since the common case is that you're coming from Java/C++/PHP/etc - the
    more mainstream languages).

    IIRC, the creator of Ruby got really hung up on the fact that Python was not a
    pure OO language, so he decided to make a new language that was (this was in the
    pre-metaclass, old-style class days of Python).

    > I was hoping for a concise explanation of what Rails does


    I'd say it's similar to Zope in that

    (1) For both, the introductory tutorials make it seem deceptively easy to use,
    but they hide a sometimes steep learning curve

    (2) For both, it's hard to find clear, concise documentation midway between
    introductory tutorials and reading the source code

    (3) For both, being frameworks, you have to commit yourself to them almost
    entirely and be prepared for some serious lock-in

    (4) Oh yeah, they're both web application frameworks :) (ROR has libraries to
    aid in building database-centric web applications: it includes an database ORM,
    a web templating language, libraries for user sessions, etc.)

    > and whether it's feasible to do something like it in (say) Python. I
    > did look at the rubyonrails.com site but there were too many marketing
    > buzzwords and downloadable videos for me to deal with.


    Yes, it's incredibly feasible. I think the Subway project is sort of heading
    down a similar path but using Python instead. I've tried a couple of times to
    use Ruby on Rails and, I have to admit, I had a tough time cutting through the
    hype (also, it seemed like the preferred method of learning about features was
    through downloading large videos).

    The ActiveRecord library (for handling mapping objects to the database) seems
    sort of powerful, but the tutorials and demo videos make a huge deal about how
    ROR can generate a web form by inspecting the database table metadata. (Useful?
    Probably. Mind-blowingly cool? Hardly.)

    Beyond ActiveRecord, there is some additional stuff to help you build
    Model-View-Controller web UIs, and then lots of the standard web app components
    (user sessions, security, logging, etc.).

    I think ROR's big selling point isn't technology-related at all: it's hype
    machine has helped build an active community, and it's a single framework as
    opposed to Python's bazillions. :)

    -Dave
     
    Dave Brueck, Aug 8, 2005
    #19
  20. Kay Schluehr

    Donn Cave Guest

    In article <>,
    Paul Rubin <http://> wrote:

    > "Donn Cave" <> writes:
    > > My vote would be Haskell first, then other functional languages.
    > > Learning FP with Objective CAML is like learning to swim in a
    > > wading pool -- you won't drown, but there's a good chance you
    > > won't really learn to swim either. Has an interesting, very
    > > rigorous OOP model though.

    >
    > I'm not sure what you mean by that about OCAML. That its functional
    > model is not pure enough? I'd like to look at Haskell as well, but I
    > have the impression that its implementation is not as serious as
    > OCaml's, i.e. no native-code compiler.


    On the contrary, there are a couple. Ghc is probably the
    leading implementation these days, and by any reasonable
    measure, it is serious.

    Objective CAML is indeed not a pure functional language.

    Donn Cave,
     
    Donn Cave, Aug 8, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?amF2YXRvcGlh?=

    CrystalReports: Value does not fall within the expected range.

    =?Utf-8?B?amF2YXRvcGlh?=, Oct 5, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    7,067
    =?Utf-8?B?amF2YXRvcGlh?=
    Oct 14, 2005
  2. Replies:
    15
    Views:
    597
    Mark Parnell
    Nov 25, 2003
  3. anamika
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    968
    anamika
    Jun 15, 2006
  4. Oleg Paraschenko

    the fall of XPath over filesystem

    Oleg Paraschenko, Jul 13, 2006, in forum: XML
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    358
    Oleg Paraschenko
    Jul 13, 2006
  5. Steven D'Aprano

    RIse and fall of languages in 2012

    Steven D'Aprano, Jan 10, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    160
    Walter Hurry
    Jan 10, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page