renzev@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 8 months agoSolutions? Where we're going, we don't need solutions.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square254fedilinkarrow-up11.15Karrow-down150file-text
arrow-up11.1Karrow-down1imageSolutions? Where we're going, we don't need solutions.lemmy.worldrenzev@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 8 months agomessage-square254fedilinkfile-text
Please dont take this seriously guys its just a dumb meme I haven’t written a single line of code in half of these languages
minus-squareCapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-28 months agoFor Python I think there’s an actual point though: A lot of Python projects are user friendly wrappers for pre-compiled high-performance code. It makes sense to call something “py<SomeKnownLibrary>” to signal what the library is.
minus-squarecalcopiritus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·8 months agoWell, it’s the same in rust, that’s why I agree more with the first interpretation. There is an existing solution in C/C++, just make some binding and call it *.rs Both python and rust use py and rs in the same way, to signal that it’s the python/rust version of that library. Of course, there are exceptions, but that’s what usually happens.
For Python I think there’s an actual point though: A lot of Python projects are user friendly wrappers for pre-compiled high-performance code. It makes sense to call something “py<SomeKnownLibrary>” to signal what the library is.
Well, it’s the same in rust, that’s why I agree more with the first interpretation.
There is an existing solution in C/C++, just make some binding and call it *.rs
Both python and rust use py and rs in the same way, to signal that it’s the python/rust version of that library.
Of course, there are exceptions, but that’s what usually happens.