Re:Why's (Poignant) Guide to Ruby (2004)
by burgertime on Thursday November 12, 2020 @12:09AM
(#25066672)
You left out Python 3. That lack of a clear transition from Python 2 didn’t help. Despite that, I still think it’s great, but it made it multiple times more difficult for a newbie to get setup.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why's (Poignant) Guide to Ruby (2004)
by Cthulhu_ on Thursday November 12, 2020 @04:14AM
(#25067974)
I've not done Python outside playing around really early on in my career during an internship, but I've never felt attracted to it; the 2 vs 3 debacle, installing the odd tool is like "what" (yeah just do `pip install this`, but first you need to install pip by using `easy_install`), and I've heard dependency management and environment setup is still quite backwards.
It needs a big ecosystem and tooling overhaul for me to be interested.
ATM I'm doing Go, which seems to have gotten the tooling part right at least.
Re:Why's (Poignant) Guide to Ruby (2004)
by ForHackernews on Thursday November 12, 2020 @07:24AM
(#25069049)
The Python dependency/environment management situation is slowly improving. Poetry is quite good, IMO: https://python-poetry.org/