In the introduction to Bruce Eckel's Thinking In Java, he says, in 1998:

> 
> Programming is about managing
>  complexity: the complexity of the
>  problem you want to solve, laid upon
>  the complexity of the machine in which
>  it is solved. Because of this
>  complexity, most of our programming
>  projects fail. And yet, of all the
>  programming languages of which I am
>  aware, none of them have gone all-out
>  and decided that their main design
>  goal would be to conquer the
>  complexity of developing and
>  maintaining programs.
> 
> 
> 

In the second and later editions he adds this footnote (circa 2003):

> 
> I take this back on the 2nd edition: I believe that the Python
>  language comes closest to doing
>  exactly that. See www.Python.org.
> 
> 
> 

I am a dabbler with java, with a background in Delphi (Pascal), C, C++, and Python.
Here is what I want to know:

1. What exactly did Eckel consider when he called Python 'better' at conquering complexity, and are his thoughts on track with others who have used both?
2. What do you think about conquering complexity? Is the shorter and more terse syntax of Python a key way to conquer complexity (and thus, for instance, Jython might be a nice bridge of Java's great libraries, and Python's terse syntax), or is the strong-typing-mentality of Java, which inherits this idea from C++, which inherited that idea from simula, I think it was, a key to conquering complexity? Or is it the Rapid Application Designer (think Delphi, or for Java, the excellent free NetBeans window/form designer tools) or components, or beans, or J2EE? What conquers all, for you?

This is already tagged subjective. [edit]

[Note: More on Bruce's thoughts, on why he loves Python are found here.](http://www.artima.com/intv/aboutme.html) A key quote from the article:

> 
> Bruce Eckel: They say you can hold
>  seven plus or minus two pieces of
>  information in your mind. I can't
>  remember how to open files in Java.
>  I've written chapters on it. I've done
>  it a bunch of times, but it's too many
>  steps. And when I actually analyze it,
>  I realize these are just silly design
>  decisions that they made. Even if they
>  insisted on using the Decorator
>  pattern in java.io, they should have
>  had a convenience constructor for
>  opening files simply. Because we open
>  files all the time, but nobody can
>  remember how. It is too much
>  information to hold in your mind.
> 
> 
> 

So, chunk theory. By the chunk theory metric, Python kills everybody else dead. I'll grant him that. But what is the metric you use? I would like to particularly invite people to stand up for Java, and oppose Bruce, if you care to.

[Please do not vote to re-open, this subject is inherently incendiary, and my gaffes have made it more-so. I agree with the moderators.]