View source for Talk:Python (programming language)/Archive 1

{{Archive box|auto=long}}
{{subpages}}

== High abstraction level ==

I am missing a useful comment on the fact that since it is a very high-level interpreted scripting language, it is not as fast as a compiled program.<br/>
--[[User:Morten Juhl Johansen|Morten Juhl Johansen]] 06:42, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

:I think the issue is a little more complicated, because python code can theoretically be JIT-compiled, which would make it run at the speed of a natively compiled program. I'm not sure about the current state of compilers/VMs though. But the statement is indeed true of CPython. --[[User:Ion Alexandru Morega|Ion Alexandru Morega]] 07:05, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

::I have some, quite positive, personal experience in time-consuming Python programs; thus I add a section "Run-time efficiency". [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 14:39, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I've been invited to join Citizendium in January 2021, for the express purpose of helping with updating the Python content (the computer language). My initial thought is it wouldn't take a lot to update this page.  I'd suggest a section on the Python 2.x to 3.x backward incompatible leap and tweak the exhibited syntax accordingly (minor changes). I've been authoring a more narrative account on Medium which I would gladly include a link to in 3rd party references. Happy to provide a friend link to [https://kirbyurner.medium.com/some-python-history-72f2510d1930?sk=a1e91af7d5be0afbea084359e7b112ff that article] in the meantime, with some of the missing information for this article.  [[User:Kirby Urner|Kirby Urner]] ([[User talk:Kirby Urner|talk]]) 03:30, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

== Article name ==

This should be at [[Python (programming language)]], no? [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 10:07, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

== Illustrations? ==

Perhaps [[:Image:Python-cheat-sheet-v1.png]] may be of use here. [[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

== Release information ==

I just removed some very dated information (3-4 years old) about python's release history. I also removed the bit about python 3.0 being in alpha.

How do people feel about including such lists of releases in the article? It seems likely to me that we will not be able to keep them up to date, why it might be better to remove them altogether. Could we put the article into a form which could stand for a few years without feeling dated? [[User:Johan A. Förberg|Johan A. Förberg]] 22:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

:I was wondering about that -- I started to put them into a 2 or 3 column format since they so dominate the page, but really, I don't see them as essential for the article. At most, a link to the release page of the Python project would seem to suffice. 

:There isn't a Monty or a Full release of Python, is there? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 04:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

: I think removing the list is a good idea. It does not really help to understand what python is and it does not describe python either. -- [[User:Alexander Wiebel|Alexander Wiebel]] 09:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)