Thanks, I have been doubting some of the patterns like singleton for years. And I just used Static class(C#) or module(vb and python) instead of singleton. I saw people use singleton just because they want to use singleton. I think we should accept that time has changed and we are to implement the patterns in new ways.
Usually I don't listen any conferences because they are mostly boring and telling you unnecessary things but this one is very interesting. I agree we need a new book like GOF but for Python. And if someone write it then please put examples from the real world.
Well, I dont know. I prefer to have a Singleton in a constructor instead of leveraging a language property of Python that module is a Singleton. Constructor seems to be more generic and intuitive. If more Pythonic means "utilize every possible quirk of the language" then I am not on board with that.
I really disagree with him. I think design pattern has its own purpose and python embraces some of that (decorator, singleton...) well, i think you need design patterns, but in the right cenario and in the right way
But with which part do you disagree, exactly? I didn't mean to make a point that patterns are irrelevant in general (sorry if I made it sound that way) but that we shouldn't naively copy implementations from other programming languages
@@NNPlayaPL I 100% agree with you, I have had Java and .Net developers straight off the bat recommending me to implement their beloved design pattern which is almost always unnecessary in Python/Project
Yeah I didn't have any problem with his English. He has an accent, but his english is damn good. (If you think he's hard to listen to, check out the indian programmer channels)
I always like it when I see someone with the b***s to give a talk when they aren't fluent. Though for some reason I find indian accents extremely difficult to follow, so I guess I'm a hypocrite
Speed up to 1.75x.
Nice talk with some good points. Thx.
Thanks, I have been doubting some of the patterns like singleton for years. And I just used Static class(C#) or module(vb and python) instead of singleton. I saw people use singleton just because they want to use singleton. I think we should accept that time has changed and we are to implement the patterns in new ways.
Usually I don't listen any conferences because they are mostly boring and telling you unnecessary things but this one is very interesting. I agree we need a new book like GOF but for Python. And if someone write it then please put examples from the real world.
great talk. targetting new user. i also show this video to my friend who came from Java.
Nice talk, and a very interesting topic, well presented!
Great talk, "Why you don't need SOME design patterns in Python?" would be a better title??
Thanks. Regarding title - Oh yes, definitely! I regret giving it such a title but I cannot undo that now
or even "Pythonic implementation of some design patterns"
Well, I dont know. I prefer to have a Singleton in a constructor instead of leveraging a language property of Python that module is a Singleton. Constructor seems to be more generic and intuitive. If more Pythonic means "utilize every possible quirk of the language" then I am not on board with that.
Beautiful Talk!
Is it just me or the guy asking the question at the end is the guy from this talk? th-cam.com/video/bsyjSW46TDg/w-d-xo.html
Nice story, thanks!
singleton implementation is Super... unnecessary people have just made it complicated...
I really disagree with him. I think design pattern has its own purpose and python embraces some of that (decorator, singleton...) well, i think you need design patterns, but in the right cenario and in the right way
But with which part do you disagree, exactly? I didn't mean to make a point that patterns are irrelevant in general (sorry if I made it sound that way) but that we shouldn't naively copy implementations from other programming languages
@@NNPlayaPL I 100% agree with you, I have had Java and .Net developers straight off the bat recommending me to implement their beloved design pattern which is almost always unnecessary in Python/Project
Jesus, he butchers English so much. Very hard to listen to.
I think you're just having trouble. I haven't had a single problem understanding him.
Yeah I didn't have any problem with his English.
He has an accent, but his english is damn good.
(If you think he's hard to listen to, check out the indian programmer channels)
I always like it when I see someone with the b***s to give a talk when they aren't fluent. Though for some reason I find indian accents extremely difficult to follow, so I guess I'm a hypocrite
nie wzywaj imienia Pana Boga na daremno. Dla mnie ang. OK, bo wszystko rozumiem co gada.
Just listened at 2x speed without a problem. His English was just fine. Quirky, but perfectly intelligible (which is the most important thing).