Google Developers Day US - Python Design Patterns

In a similar vein, I found Alex Martinelli's talk on design patterns very level-headed and instructive: ▶ this video

in ““Design Patterns” Aren't (2002)” · View on HN

Among the books "programmers have read", I have read K&R, Programming Pearls and bits and pieces of Effective Java and C++. I thoroughly enjoyed these books. The other books on the "have read" list are on my "don't bother reading" list. Code Complete, Pragmatic Programmer, Mythical Man Month et al aren't my kind of books. As far as design patterns go, I believe if you code in Python/Ruby/Perl etc, books covering them in Java/C++ are needlessly verbose and boring. I recommend Alex Martelli's talks ▶ this video [link] And this book which covers design patterns using Ruby. [link] Both approaches actually show you practical examples of design patterns in the standard library or real world problems, and shuns patterns which aren't applicable to the language or are too trivial. These talks aren't the end-all, but they will give you a good overall knowledge, and will make further exploration easy. And from the "haven't read" list, CLRS is a good book and isn't as dense as it is generally taken to be. It does have sections on proofs, but you can skip it and jump directly to the data structure/algorithm. The pseudo code used in the book is extremely clear, and will convert to simple python in most of the cases. Use it as a reference, or read first few hundred pages. If the book isn't for you, you will know it after you have read the first 100 pages. Another book I recommend is Sedgewick's book on Algorithms. I have read the C version. It mostly covers basic data structures and some accompa

in “Books Programmers Don't Really Read But Recommend” · View on HN

I looked at couple of them. Some of the patterns has a note mentioning it is a port of C#/Java/C++ implementation in the Wikipedia article. Python is drastically different from C#/Java/C++, and a direct port of classical patterns won't make much sense. It will work, but it will the equivalent of Fortran programmers writing Frotran in Python. If anyone is interested, this talk by Alex Martelli is a good starting point: ▶ this video I think Bruce Eckel was writing a book on "Design Patterns" in Python, but that's not completed. However, there is a book using Ruby, which shows the classical approach for implementing design patters, then shows how it is done in Ruby: [link]

in “Design Patterns in Python (Free Book)” · View on HN

Cool. I'll take a look at the book. I was specifically interested in Python design patterns. I still remember the talk from Alex Martinelli at Google: ▶ this video , and I just saw there is an updated version: [link]

in “Design Patterns in Dynamic Languages (1996)” · View on HN

>> I use lists and strings and arrays with no concern about how many elements they contain or where the memory comes from. > You should worry. If you don't want your server or your app to run slow, you should worry about these things. I am pretty sure he is saying he doesn't have to manually allocate and free memory and worry about off by one errors when iterating. He is comparing equivalents; he isn't saying since I am using Python I can shove 1 billion numbers in a list. > Can you imagine going into a programming interview and saying something like this? The only occasion when programming interviews have any significance is when you are seeking a job. Using them as a benchmark for anything else is flawed. > It's pretty difficult to implement reliable, readable and proven design patterns if you're just passing around dictionaries of dictionaries and lists. Translating proven, classical design patterns to Python or Ruby will result in shitty code. The proven design patterns don't have to be the same for all languages. It's idiomatic to use dictionaries/list in place of classes where applicable. [link] ▶ this video [link]

in “OOP Isn't a Fundamental Particle of Computing” · View on HN