Yahoo! Launches Python Developer Center

SimonW writes "Yahoo! has launched a Python Developer Center as part of their Developer Network. The new site explains how to access Yahoo!'s many web service APIs using Python, and includes tutorials on using Python with REST, JSON, XML and RSS. The site joins Yahoo!'s existing developer centers for PHP and JavaScript."

Javascript

[kevin_conaway]

Python developer, I think this is great. I'm glad that Python is gaining more acceptance.

If the quality is on par with their Javascript library, we're in for a real treat

Re:Javascript The 'L' Word.

[Reverend528]

Up next...Lisp! Oh, wait.

The web already has a Lisp dialect. It's called XML.

Re:Javascript The 'L' Word.

[bhaberman]

No, XML is fine. DSSSL is a crime against humanity.

You're not helping things.

[Virak]

If you want people to switch to Scheme, explain why they should and how it would benefit them, don't just say "lol ur language is teh sux, use mine". That's exactly the kind of stupid shit that gives Lisp users a reputation as a bunch of arrogant assholes.

And yes, Scheme is a great language, and I love it, but it's not the best thing for every situation. If you truly think one language is the best choice for everything, then you're a total idiot.

Also, no even slightly popular browser supports client side scripting with Scheme, and most web hosts don't offer server-side scripting with it either.

Re:You're not helping things.

[computational super]

If you truly think one language is the best choice for everything, then you're a total idiot.

That's right! If you write applications that require fewer than 5 different languages for ongoing maintenance, you're just fitting a square peg into a round hole! You're just one of the "I have a hammer so everything is a nail" people! Your custom JVM written in C should be interpreting java byte codes that have embedded Python scripts that build Javascript output that interpret TCL for maximum flexibility! Bah

Having it both ways

[amightywind]

That's exactly the kind of stupid shit that gives Lisp users a reputation as a bunch of arrogant assholes. And yes, Scheme is a great language, and I love it, but it's not the best thing for every situation. If you truly think one language is the best choice for everything, then you're a total idiot.

First to insult me as a Lisp bigot, then you try to associate yourself with it. Amusing! You Python bottom feeders shouldn't be so sensitive.

Re:Having it both ways

[Virak]

And how exactly is this contradictory? I can be a Lisp user without being a stuck up ass who thinks that *their* language is the only one that anyone should ever use for anything.

Re:Rogues gallery of languages

[Millenniumman]

Bah, Smalltalk is better than all of those.

I could live with it

[amightywind]

I can't say I have specialized in it, but I have used it. If you are going to program with side effects (OO) it doesn't get any simpler. I could live with it. How can anyone explain the madness of Python's fashionability over smalltalk?

Re:I could live with it

[haystor]

1. The free version of Python is the standard version. So a new developer will get to use exactly what the best developers are using.

2. Libraries.

Re:I could live with it

[Millenniumman]

1. There is no "Smalltalk". There are different sets of libraries, e.g. Squeak, F-Script, all based around the syntax and paradigm. 2. Smalltalk never became very popular, partly because at the time the speed boost of a lower level language was more noticeable than it is now. Python is also less fast than lower level languages, but that isn't as important now and Python has gotten a lot of momentum.

Re:I could live with it

[jma05]

Python reached critical mass, SmallTalk did not. A language is not everything, there is also the tools, libraries, community etc. Python is not best at any one of those. But it is good in every one of those.

Let's take an example:
I don't like C++ as a language. But I much rather develop a Win32 database front-end in C++ Builder rather than Python. Why? Because this specific tool was perfected for that specific task with a proper IDE and a great framework. Likewise, there are tasks for which Python is the bes

Re:Rogues gallery of languages

[Peaker]

The language is simpler than the others yet for more expressive and powerful. Learn something. Use it!

Oh is it?

Scheme with or without macros?

Scheme without macros is a laughably weak language compared to Python.
Scheme with macros can not be said to be simpler than Python.

More expressive? Show me any good expressive Scheme program that can not be expressed with round-the-same-length Python program, that is also easier on the eyes?

Re:Rogues gallery of arguments

[bhaberman]

Hurting the eyes is an infinitely practical metric. The parentheses in Scheme make it truly painful to read and write, at least for me. Python is very easy to read and write. I use both Scheme and Python, and while I have never had trouble with Python indentation I always mess up the parentheses in Scheme, and I continually have to start counting to figure out where things begin and end. If you want a good functional language that's easy on the eyes, use Haskell.

Re:Rogues gallery of arguments

[Peaker]

No no, what I meant was: Show me a Scheme program that takes less code than Python OR that the Python code is not more readable. That's EASIER to show than showing BOTH of the conditions.

Can you do it? Saying "Scheme is more expressive" requires some backing up.

And there was still no reply about Scheme with or without macros.

Misconceptions about scheme

[amightywind]

The language where each programmer uses macros to try to reinvent their very own real object system,

Some do. I use yasos which is part of slib. You must be a C++ person who doesn't like macros because one of the priests of strong typing told you not to. A pity. Macros are an irreplacable feature being forgotten now in dumbed down languages. Read Paul Graham's On Lisp someday and get clued in.

real language syntax,

???

real containers,

Scheme supports Lists, vectors, and alists and iteration natively.

Re:Misconceptions about scheme

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be a C++ person

I am very experienced in C++, and it totally sucks. Yet you go ahead and make the assumption that I would advocate usage of such an RSI-inducing language. I was also using Lisp decades ago when you were probably still in grade school, and I am very familiar a couple of dozen other languages. Sorry to break your bubble, but Scheme isn't the panacea that you make it out to be. It's a good language for writing compilers or implementing other languages, but beyond that niche it's not s

Re:Misconceptions about scheme

[amightywind]

I was also using Lisp decades ago when you were probably still in grade school, and I am very familiar a couple of dozen other languages.

To display such ignorance after these long decades doesn't speak well of you.

Sounds great on paper, but in the real world, you don't really get anywhere with it. 50 years after Lisp was invented, it's still on the fringes, and that's one reason why: no standardized powerful constructs.

This is an argument? Any language goes through this period of balkanization. How ma

Re:Javascript

[EatHam]

if you use the Python IDE it does; however, if you develop for Windows, and use Notepad++ or Notepad, it does not work fine.

Re:Javascript

[stuntpope]

Wrong, and though I'm redundant, I'll repeat it so it's visible in the thread. You can write Python in DOS edit, notepad, TextPad, anything on windows that saves as plain text, and as long as you are consistent with what you use for indentation (all tabs, or all spaces), it will work.

Re:Javascript

[Vexorian]

I would never understand python and making it indent-dependant ruined the language in my opinion, lack of block begin/close is just lame and makes the stuff harder to read besides it goes against one of the main principles of programming . Programs must have an start and an end.

I actually think that if anything it makes things harder to read. For an scripting language that is supposed to be easy then specific begin and end blocks for different kinds of statements are always a good idea. So you know that "th

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

lack of block begin/close is just lame

Why? It's the same amount of functionality in less code.

and makes the stuff harder to read

Have you ever tried to read a Python program? Python's one of the most readable programming languages around. Part of this is because it doesn't use entirely superfluous syntax like curly braces everywhere.

it goes against one of the main principles of programming . Programs must have an start and an end.

What are you talking about? You do realise that the beginni

Re:Javascript

[bogado]

Have you ever tried to read a Python program? Python's one of the most readable programming languages around. Part of this is because it doesn't use entirely superfluous syntax like curly braces everywhere.

just because it is readable to you, that is used to it, don't mean is automaticly readable to everyone. Block delimiters, be they brackets like C derived languages or the "do" "end" from other languages like ruby do help reading. The lack of delimiters make it harder to understant when two blocks end at

Actually try Python

[Peaker]

Many of us Pythoneers have been there. Exactly where you are, bitching about the "whitespace".
Only after using it for a little while we understood that we can never go back.
The way I resisted whitespace in the beginning now seems so stupid..

There really is no real claim against significant whitespace except the knee-jerk reaction of ".. but .. but .. its just wrong!"

If you actually try to use Python, you'll never want to go back to cluttering your visual space with unnecessary noise {}.

There's always the ob

Re:Actually try Python

[kace]

Amen. You've got to have whitespace in any program anyway just to make it readable -- why shouldn't it do some work?!

And, please, I'd rather crawl through a ditch full of broken bottles than suffer through even one more "bracket audit."
"... four, five, ... uhm, .... One, two, three, ...."

In a large program, though, I do tend to use comments to identify the end of blocks.

Python is a great language. People who get hung up on a piddling syntax thing like this are missing the point.

Minor question

[Peaker]

In a large program, though, I do tend to use comments to identify the end of blocks.

To me, this implies that in a large program, you have very large blocks.

Why don't you just divide them up into very small functions so that each function is trivial and very easy to verify for correctness, and incidentally very easy to follow the indentation of?

Re:Minor question

[kace]

To me, this implies that in a large program, you have very large blocks.
Why don't you just divide them up into very small functions ...?

You're right in that the issue that I'm addressing is really large blocks, particularly when there are nested blocks of any size as well. My tendency is to use functions for code that will be repeated at some point. My concern with your suggestion is that arbitrarily dividing up a block of related code into functions would just cause other readability problems (havi

Division into functions

[Peaker]

My tendency is to use functions for code that will be repeated at some point.

I strongly disagree with this method. I agree with the whole functions' section in the Linux kernel coding style.

I think that you should divide functions such that each function is trivial and more importantly trivially verifiable. With good naming conventions and division of responsibilities, you don't need to "jump between functions" as you only read the functions for implementation details. The interface and what they do should

Re:Actually try Python

[Nevyn]

Many of us Pythoneers have been there. Exactly where you are, bitching about the "whitespace". Only after using it for a little while we understood that we can never go back.

When I first learnt python I assumed the whitespace thing would be no big deal, it's only after using it for a while that I saw how moronic it was.

There really is no real claim against significant whitespace except the knee-jerk reaction of ".. but .. but .. its just wrong!"

• 10 year old editor habits don't work anymore, Ie.

Re:Actually try Python

[Peaker]

When I first learnt python I assumed the whitespace thing would be no big deal, it's only after using it for a while that I saw how moronic it was.

No offence, but I believe you are lying here. I mean, I think that a little white lie of "yeah I used it a lot and then I thought so" is much easier on your keyboard and much more probable than you ACTUALLY USING PYTHON and disliking the whitespace. People who actually use Python for REAL work, really tend to become fans of the significant whitespace.

10 year old

Re:Actually try Python

[Nevyn]

No offence, but I believe you are lying here

None taken, python fan boys wishing reality were different is well documented.

People who actually use Python for REAL work, really tend to become fans of the significant whitespace.

See, you did it again.

Ofcourse copy&paste and reindent work. Just use the emacs python-mode shortcut

You mis-spelt "of course they don't work, you have to use this totally different editor feature", there you go wishing reality away again. I can see how you must ge

Re:Actually try Python

[Peaker]

None taken, python fan boys wishing reality were different is well documented.
See, you did it again.

I can take your becoming offensive as strong evidence that you indeed lied there. :-)
Ofcourse my belief that was a lie is simply based on experience arguing with several real-life developers who lie that they used Python because they know that otherwise their whitespace knee-jerk reaction is silly and they are portrayed as dumb.

You mis-spelt "of course they don't work, you have to use this totally di

Re:Actually try Python

[Nevyn]

I can take your becoming offensive as strong evidence that you indeed lied there. :-)

You called me a liar, without knowing anything about me ... and presumably without even looking at my website. I'm pretty bored arguing with you, as you're just giving the party line of "Oh, that opinion's not really a problem ... you just think it is, but you're wrong" combined with offensivly suggesting I'm just stupid for not realizing this on my own. So allow me to just say: Your opinion is wrong, you ignorant pyth

Re:Actually try Python

[Peaker]

Almost everybody lies.

By that definition, almost everyone is a liar.

So don't be too hard on yourself. You only lied a little white lie about using a lot of Python.

Its really no big deal.

Re:Javascript

[SirSlud]

C/C++/Python/Perl/PHP/Javascript/ServersideJS/Jav a

They're all good, they're all useful, and they're all readable (although Perl comes at the bottom of my list.)

But your block-ending comment is inane. You can never know *what* block was ending (ie, what control or condition statement started the block) without scrolling up, indentation-dependant or curly-brace dependant. You must use *really* fancy closing brakets; the kind that actually contain meta-data on the block they're closing or something.

I kinda li

Re:Javascript

[bogado]

I am one of those programers, I tried python two or three times and there are other things that I don't like about it, like having to declare the "self" parameter for instance. But all of those things are minnor in relation to the "white space" is the block thingy. This makes it harder for me to read the code, make's it all ugly and seem wrong. It takes the fun out of the programing.

I like ruby much better, too bad it is not as popular as python. But the main point here is that all of this is a matter of ta

Re:Javascript

[SirSlud]

You lost me when you said that it takes the "fun" out of programming.

Whython

[CopaceticOpus]

It's pretty cool of Yahoo to provide so much to the dev community. It's definitely improved my feelings about the company.

I wonder why they've made this foray into the Python world? I know they decided to focus on PHP a few years back. Did they find some tasks were easier to accomplish in Python? Or are they simply trying to reach out to another developer community?

2004

[booch]

Python is so 2004. Everyone knows that Ruby is the current language du jour. Yahoo needs to catch up.

Re:Whython

[carlivar]

yp.yahoo.com uses Python.

Re:Whython

[maxume]

It wasn't a 'corporate' effort. See:

http://simon.incutio.com/archive/2006/08/08/ydn [incutio.com]

Re:Here's to progress

[Aladrin]

Did you honestly just compare giving up the name of a journalist to the attempted genocide of Jewish people? You are one brave... Oh, you posted AC. I take that back.

No, providing a few dev tools does not make past mistakes 'better'. But it does show they can actually care.

How refreshing!

[y5]

Every time I see a story about Yahoo concerning developers, it's exactly what I want to hear. While their competitors are saying "do no evil", Yahoo seems to be living it.

I don't know if I'm quite there yet, but my hard-to-break habit of Googling everything might be worth breaking if this kind of developer-focused attitude from Yahoo continues like it has. It's at least very tempting.

Re:How refreshing!

[Daytona955i]

Yes, because it's not like google [google.com] has anything like this [google.com] available. [google.com]

Re:How refreshing!

[LnxAddct]

Because Google's Summer of Code, or code.google.com or, more importantly, code.google.com/hosting weren't enough? The hundred patches that Google gave back to Wine after getting Wine to work with Picasa, or the many other libraries and APIs that Google provides. What Yahoo is doing is great, but you're not giving Google nearly enough credit.
Regards,
Steve

Re:How refreshing!

[y5]

What Yahoo is doing is great, but you're not giving Google nearly enough credit.

You might be right. But I've had the chance to use the Web API's for Yahoo, Google, and MSN. Yahoo's Web Search API has been much easier to use than Google's or MSN's. I know there are many other API's to use than just web search, but I've been impressed with what I've seen from Yahoo, more so than from the others.

Direction is everything, and you have to admit Yahoo has been moving in the right direction lately. Here's to hoping they don't lose focus of what's giving them such good publicity! =)

Re:FIXED

[Chapter80]

While their competitors are saying "do no evil", Yahoo seems to be handing dissidents over to the authorities without hesitation.

Uhh.. Not to nit-pick... ok, yes, to nit-pick (sorry!), I think Yahoo's competitors are saying "Don't be evil" [google.com] not "Do no evil".

You're not the only one making this mistake [googlefight.com].

Re:How refreshing!

[rainman_bc]

While their competitors are saying "do no evil", Yahoo seems to be living it.

Need I remind you about the X10 popups? That caused me to switch my home page over to Google and have never, ever looked back.

Perhaps Yahoo is just playing catchup to google with crap like search.yahoo.com and now this. Seems like they are no longer innovating but they are just copying.

Seen their new Mail client? Fully Ajax driven. Hmmm. Gmail anyone?

Re:Now Ruby!

[Slaimus]

The whole point of a web service is that it is language-neutral. There is nothing preventing you from using Ruby or any other language that can take advantage of web services. Just look at the WSDL and make use of it.

Yawn.

[JoeyLemur]

Wake me when they create a Ruby/Rails section.

Guido! Let my whitespace go!

Re:Yawn.

[Anonymous Coward]

> Wake me when they create a Ruby/Rails section.

Snakes and a Train?

Whitespace

[Anonymous Coward]

I know everybody gets hung up on the whitespace thing when they look at Python. But you know what? Once you start actually coding in it for any significant amount of time, it's not a big deal. When you first start, I know you expect it to be really annoying, but that simply doesn't turn out to be the case. The supposed problem evaporates.

Every time you hear anybody moan about Python's significant whitespace, ask them how long they've spent actually writing Python. You'll see the same thing as I do - that virtually everybody complaining has never given Python a chance, and that virtually everybody who has given Python a chance has realised that the significant whitespace isn't a big deal.

Re:Whitespace

[Anonymous Coward]

That's true. Once you use Python for a significant amount of time, you find that there are far more annoying aspects of the language than significant whitespace.

Re:Whitespace

[Peaker]

Like what?

Re:Whitespace

[bhaberman]

No lambdas, no ternary operator (yes I know, not pythonic), no switch statement (think Ruby, not C++), scoping rules are wrong (for example, list comprehensions leak variables - C++ for loops don't!).

Underscores! __init__ __new__ __getattr__ __setattr__ __len__ __getitem__ . . . .

range(1,5) = [1, 2, 3, 4]

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. Python has an incredible number of infuriating misfeatures for such a useful language.

Python sort of pretends to be a functional language, and you can do a lot

Re:Whitespace

[idlemachine]

No lambdas? Seriously? So the lambda keyword that my copy of Python 2.5 recognises is..what? A local patch? Or simply evidence that you don't have the slightest clue of what you're talking about?

No ternary operator? Firstly, this isn't C, and secondly, you'll be happy to know that people who're unwilling to learn new approaches have bitched often and hard enough that it now exists in a pythonic form: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0308/ [python.org] You'll find the PEP interesting for at least two reasons (hint: i

Re:Whitespace

[Ian Bicking]

No lambdas

Well, of course that isn't true. Lambda is syntactically limited in Python. Instead you have to use named functions if you are doing something complicated that can't fit in a lambda. That causes two changes: you have to come up with a name for the function (which I don't think is a substantial burden) and you have to declare the function before you use it (which can be a little annoying in some circumstances). But altogether, the lambda thing is way overused as a criticism; anonymous func

Re:Yawn.

[twocents]

Ughhh, so you're touting a model-view-controller type of Web development framework and yet you need a tutorial from Yahoo in order to tie into neutral services?

Why don't you write a Rails/Yahoo API tutorial?

Re:Yawn.

[thryllkill]

I think you might be in for a looooooong sleep there buddy.

Re:Yawn.

[Black Perl]

Pick one of the following:

Abstraction || Versatility

That's what I thought too. I was very skeptical until I actually started learning rails. I now see why it is getting very popular, because it takes advantage of some of the unique aspects of Ruby to blur that dividing line. It actually provides both abstraction and versatility. You get a lot of help out of the box or through an increasing number of plugins, but there are also convenient hooks to customize apps in pretty much any way you want.

Howto

[kevin_conaway]

Furthermore, unlike their previous offerings, they have released little new code here. The only code they have released is an API to their search engine. The rest seem to be HOWTOs on how to python to access their services.

Still good info though. Thanks

Product Placement

[RobertB-DC]

The great and mighty Anonymous wrote:
Launch...?
Python....?
Snakes on a Plane!!!

Yep, it's another Product Placement deal. Pretty shameless -- all the searches shown in the movie start at yahoo.com, and yahoo.com plugs the movie right down to the programmer level. Pitiful.

Value of their feeds?

[halosfan]

While browsing through this, I noticed the following in ther Weather RSS feed page:

The feeds are provided free of charge for use by individuals and non-profit organizations for personal, non-commercial uses.

and then

Yahoo! also reserves the right to require you to cease distributing these feeds at any time for any reason.

So, while it's cool and all, is there any value to using their weather RSS feed (and I assume it's similar with other services), beyond my ability to play with them? I mean, even I'm not making any money off it, presumably, if I put the effort in accessing those feeds, I expect them to be available to me in the future? Or do they provide a paid-for version for this?

Re:Value of their feeds?

[kevin_conaway]

Yahoo! also reserves the right to require you to cease distributing these feeds at any time for any reason.

So, while it's cool and all, is there any value to using their weather RSS feed (and I assume it's similar with other services), beyond my ability to play with them? I mean, even I'm not making any money off it, presumably, if I put the effort in accessing those feeds, I expect them to be available to me in the future? Or do they provide a paid-for version for this?

I would imagine that its just

Re:Value of their feeds?

[0racle]

I expect them to be available to me in the future

Why? It's their service, they could stop it or move it to a pay service at any time. Guess what, anyone providing a free service could do that even (gasp) Google. They could make GMail a pay service tomorrow if they felt like it.

Your expectations seem to be ever so slightly unrealistic.

Re:Value of their feeds?

[halosfan]

I didn't say anywhere I want them to provide their service to me for free. If it makes it easier to understand, assume I'm willing to pay money to subscribe to this service in exchange to the guarantee that it would be available to me for a year. Can I do that? Or all they provide is the free version that they can discontinue at any time for any reason?

Great, and good packages

[masklinn]

Not only did they release a nice guide, but the guide is actually good: while the first XML library they talk about in XML parsing is xml.dom.minidom, they also explain how to use the XML API with effbot's ElementTree (and link to both ElementTree and cElementTree), which is more than likely the best Python XML library. And the recommend UFP (Universal Feed Parser) for RSS parsing.

The worst thing you can say about them is that they did their homework, kudos to the Yahoo guys.

Re:Great, and good packages

[ChowyChow]

Not only that, but they chose to use simplejson which is superior and under a free-er license than the library json-py.

*applaudes yahoo*

Re:Great, and good packages

[mshiltonj]

Not only did they release a nice guide, but the guide is actually good:

Not only is your sentence redundant, but your sentence is actually redundant.

Re:Great, and good packages

[masklinn]

No, something can be "nice" (well written or easy to understand) and awfully bad technically (using crappy code, the wrong libs, bad style, ...)

Snakes are naturally quiet

[suitepotato]

I'm just glad they did this ahead of any Ruby foray. Online, all I hear anymore is loud rowdy Ruby peope and anti-Python people, some of whom are the same. At the bookstore, I easily see two times more Python books than Ruby. This tells me that despite the online hype, there's still a lot of quiet interest in Python and it isn't that Ruby or anything else is pushing us aside, it's that we're not very vociferous.

Which is fine with me. As long as Yahoo and other outlets keep that in mind that is. Python is no

Re:Snakes are naturally quiet

[carlivar]

Ruby on Rails is only at v1.1. Thus the lack of books. When browsing Amazon however it seems like there are several scheduled to be released this fall.

Re:Snakes are naturally quiet

[abigor]

Python is used commercially all over the place. My friend bought Civilization IV, and I was astounded to see it supports game modifications via Python. Meanwhile, I read an interview with the guy behind PyQt, the Python bindings for Trolltech's Qt library, and he said he has over 200 commercial users - including Disney, Pixar, and Industrial Light and Magic. All of these companies use Python and Qt, an extremely powerful app development environment if I've ever seen one. It seems like a natural match.

So the

Re:Snakes are naturally quiet

[DeathPenguin]

No doubt there's still a lot of room for Python, but since you brought up the bookstore metric: http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/12/ruby_boo k_sales_surpass_python.html [oreilly.com]

Re:Snakes are naturally quiet

[Senzei]

In the interest of being fair, Ruby is the current hype language and hasn't had much in the way of books until recently, of course book sales are going to be way up. I would expect them to die down a bit as the language reaches whatever natural saturation level it is going to hit.

I also am having a hard time recalling any good OReilly Python books that came out recently. That may have something to do with this as well.

creator of Python works at Google

[DrDitto]

Its sort of ironic that Guido van Rossum, the creator of Python, now works at Yahoo's competitor (Google) [slashdot.org].

Excellent news

[DrGalaxy]

This page mainly demonstrates how to take advantage of Yahoo's APIs with Python. I think that the engineers and managers at Yahoo must be paying attention to the competative edge in productivity that Python can offer. It really is an all purpose programming tool that works well in many niches.

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[abigor]

You're in luck! Here's a quote from Guido: "Maybe my spiritual beliefs shine through here -- I'm a convinced atheist."

I don't know anything about Ruby's creator, but Larry Wall has always creeped me out too. I sure was happy when Python came along - a sensible language created by a logical Dutchman.

Matz said to be LDS

[iggymanz]

supposedly Matz is a real rarity, a Japanese mormon. [textdrive.com] Not that surprising, since Japan is all about weird fusions

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[abigor]

Where precisely did I say I think everyone should think like me? I think you have some anger issues to work out. A reading comprehension class might help too, as would a sense of humour.

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[bhaberman]

I don't know, maybe the fact that for Perl 6 he released a bunch of Apocalypses. Apparently these are "revelations" and not "the end of the world." I suppose Larry Wall is God. Or His Prophet.

On the other hand, perhaps Larry IS God . . .

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[swartze]

As an atheist, I'd like to stick to a language created by an atheist

Wow, That's quite a religious conviction you've got there.

Hard to do if you are a GNU user

[amightywind]

As an atheist, I'd like to stick to a language created by an atheist.

You are narrowing your options considering who [stallman.org] who developed the initial versions of GCC.

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[cerberusss]

As an atheist, I'd like to stick to a language created by an atheist.

Then Faith Based Programming [kuro5hin.org] must not be for you. Quote:

When I begin to code, I stop trying to follow the rules and logic of my own experience over the years. Instead I allow the divine spirit take my hand and control the code that is written.

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[sunweight]

Every morning, before starting, I speak the Programmer's Prayer: "Lord: I begin today on your Great Work. Guide my hand, and bring forth the Code your Will desires. Give me your Strength to keep my Faith, and your Sensory Deprivation to ignore temptation right before my eyes. Goto Lord.

So God writes in Forth, not Lisp, as many supposed.

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[Anonymous Coward]

What does religion have to do with programming languages? As a _true_ atheist you should care about this particular point.
I'm an atheist too, and the point is to keep our minds open and willing to accept and change our thoughts.
You cannot ignore other people just because of their religion, that is not what an atheist stands for, we are against those lines of thinking.

Would you not take your medication if you found it it was invented by a religious person?

Re:Is Python created by a religious person?

[Lord Kano]

Atheism IS a religion.

A religion is a belief system.

LK