@renzev to Programmer [email protected]English • 2 months agoSolutions? Where we're going, we don't need solutions.imagemessage-square162arrow-up11.13Karrow-down151file-text
arrow-up11.08Karrow-down1imageSolutions? Where we're going, we don't need solutions.@renzev to Programmer [email protected]English • 2 months agomessage-square162file-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-square@[email protected]linkfedilink1•edit-22 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-square@calcopirituslink1•2 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.