> There's no reason we can't be writing code that lasts 100 years. Code is just math.
The weather forecast is also “just math”, yet yesterday’s won’t be terribly useful next April.
> There's no reason we can't be writing code that lasts 100 years. Code is just math.
The weather forecast is also “just math”, yet yesterday’s won’t be terribly useful next April.
No, weather forecasting models are "just math". The forecast itself is an output of the model. I sure hope our weather forecasting models are still useful next year!
So all you're saying is that we should not expect individual weather forecasts, program output, and calculation results to be useful long-term. Nobody is arguing that.That's why I said "[yesterday's] weather forecast" and not "weather forecast models".
But my larger point actually also stands: Weather forecast models also, in the end, incorporate information about geography, likely temperature conditions etc., and might not be stable over 100 years.
The more interesting question is probably: Is Python more like the weather or a weather forecasting model? :)