Re:The Python Paradox
by mkl on Friday January 27, 2023 @04:45AM
(#34544310)
Industries change, needs change, new possibilities emerge. A language that doesn't change is probably either dead, dying, or headed for a tiny niche. Python changes a lot because lots of people use it and have needs and desires for it. Clojure is used very little, so doesn't have the same kind of demand for improvement or community to do it (I don't for a moment believe it couldn't be improved).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
"A language that doesn't change is probably either dead, dying, or headed for a tiny niche"
Or complete. Eternal change is not a value in itself.
Right, but I think any language that is "complete" is either dead, dying, or headed for a tiny niche (or already in a tiny niche). Can you think of any counterexamples?
The vast majority of languages are dead, dying or headed for a tiny niche. How many languages can you name that aren't? There can only be at most 3 languages with more than 25% market share.
Even Python is likely to die; in time. Most things do. Something will have to change first, at the moment it is doing great.
You seem to be arguing against something I didn't say.
All I'm saying is that change is a sign of life, and that non-change is a sign of the opposite.
Go ye unto your tool shed, examine your spanner for signs of life, and you will have the possibility of gaining enlightenment - for you are correct in your argument.
C.
C is changing (C99, C11, C17, C2x). It is also increasingly relegated to niches like embedded and systems, though there's still a lot of other use.
Web development as well, as it turns out (compile to wasm).