alternative to python

[Larz60+]

There was a reason for this.
If you were lucky enough to be chosen to work there, you were given a bunch of money and told simply to make something.
No pressure, no time limits. Whatever you needed would be provided.
The thought was that enough would materialize that it was worth doing it this way.

[nilamo]

As trash as Javascript is, I actually like having anonymous functions everywhere, which is extremely impractical in python.

From the little bit I read about go, it seemed like it was designed with "everything is parallel, always" ingrained to the core, such that any functions you write are executed in parallel. We're starting to get there with async, but there's still so little that actually works with (and it's sort of a nightmare to work with).

[micseydel]

From the little bit I read about go, it seemed like it was designed with "everything is parallel, always" ingrained to the core

Not exactly...

I like good lambdas as well. I enjoy Scala when I use it, though Python remains my go-to language.

[nilamo]

It seems to me that if your application is designed to handle concurrency, then it'd be an extremely trivial task to convert that to parallelism. Everything is already spawning tasks and waiting for them to finish, the only thing changing is the method of running those tasks, which feels like something that can be abstracted away so both methods have the same interface. That way, if you know ahead of time something won't take very long, you can make it a coroutine (as the resources needed to spawn a new process would be unnecessary).

[Larz60+]

parallel processing is a subset of concurrent processing and therefore by definition is concurrent.
However concurrent processing is not necessarily parallel processing.
Concurrency can be done with python coroutines.
Wanna watch a good video on this? see (David Beazley) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCs5OvhV9S4

[micseydel]

Larz60+ basically covered it, but I did want to just be totally explicit - the language design is meant for concurrency, and the language author emphasizes that it was concurrency and not parallelism that he was after. He wants a paradigm shift in how people think about their code, in the same way OOP and function are paradigms.

Specifically, I was responding to "it seemed like it was designed..." since we actually can know and not wonder :)

[Root13]

I'm not good at creatin languages, I like just to hate the existing ones)

[Skaperen]

i remember two languages (of many) we had back in my mainframe days:  Fortran and PL/1.  someone wrote a program the supposedly made it easier to select the compiler and run it, by scanning the program source code to figure out the language.  he was claiming a 100% correct detection for valid code.  so i wrote a program that compiled correctly under both compilers (and did the same thing either way: just copy a file).  he was afraid to let his program scan mine.

[Larz60+]

Are you talking about a make make program of sorts?
I used FORTRAN quite a bit, and wrote a few printer drivers in PL/1
They were OK for their day, but I actually liked lisp better
(and still use it once in a while, although today I use the MIT scheme dialect)

[wavic]

If I want to learn something different from Python it would be C, JS, Assembly.