[IronPython] If not IronPython, what?
Lukáš Duběda
loocas at duber.cz
Sun Aug 22 23:37:50 CEST 2010
Very nicely said, Vernon,
however, there are also users that simply don't have a choice.
We're using a commercially available DCC software that
doesn't support Python, however, it does support
.NET. So, the only way to get Python in such an
environment is IronPython.
If IPy dies, our pipeline dies with it.
So, to some, it's simply not a matter of choice,
unfortunately.
Lukáš Duběda
Director
[T] +420 602 444 164
duber studio(tm)
[M] info at duber.cz
[W] http://www.duber.cz
[A] R.A.Dvorského 601, Praha 10
[A] 10900, Czech Republic, Europe
On 22.8.2010 22:57, Vernon Cole wrote:
> Sorry for chiming in late. I've been on vacation, and since my "smart"
> phone runs Windows Mobile, it does not work very well, so I have not
> kept up on my email.
>
> When I first started in this industry, there where two groups of
> computer users: IBM and everybody else. I was in the "everybody else"
> group, and developed a deep disrespect for 'Big Blue". There were lots
> of people who were always willing to believe that anything IBM did was
> the greatest thing in the world and everything else was trash. "We are
> an IBM shop" was the excuse for a lot of what looked -- to me -- like
> mismanagement and waste..
>
> Today IBM has faded into a niche, and Microsoft is the 900 pound gorilla
> in the computing cage. There are those today who chant "WE ARE A
> MICROSOFT SHOP" as if it were a mantra embodying all good, and all else
> is evil. If you work in such a place I am sorry for you. I have worked
> in such places and I am glad I am out. By all means USE IronPython, it's
> the best tool in your shop.
>
> But let's set the record straight -- at least my humble opinion of the
> record -- dotNET was a stupid idea to start with. Why invent a new
> pseudo-machine to compile everything in, when 99% of the world is using
> the same hardware machine anyway? Pseudo machines were great when 32 K
> bytes was a large computer, by why now? The "just in time" compiler
> should be called a "waste my time" compiler. If you think I'm wrong,
> try running "hello world" in CPython and IronPython and see which one is
> faster. _Anything_ running on CLR starts up like as sleepy teenager.
> [And why oh why did they let the sales department stick it with a name
> which conflicts with an Internet domain? But I digress....]
>
> Do I support IronPython? Yes, I do. Because some poor saps are stuck
> working in "WE ARE A ... SHOP." places. Do I personally use IronPython
> for production software? Nope! I use CPython -- on Linux where possible
> and on Windows where necessary. The concept of "scientific data
> acquisition" using Windows is an oxymoron. *
>
> Max:
> I strongly encourage you to continue to look at alternatives which
> were _not_ made in Redmond, Washington, USA. If nothing else, the
> competition pushes Microsoft to continue to improve the quality of their
> products. IronPython is the greatest thing which has happened in
> Redmond since NT was shipped.
> --
> Vernon Cole
>
> * this e-mail is being written on an Ubuntu Linux box which is also
> running a closed-loop environmental control system (written in Python)
> while I type.
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Max Yaffe <maxyaffe at gmail.com
> <mailto:maxyaffe at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I've been reading the buzz around Microsoft's reduced commitment to
> Iron*
> languages and wondering if I should rethink my own commitment to
> IronPython.
> To fill you in, I'm a designer of instruments and software for
> scientific
> data acquisition and analysis. My current software uses a dynamic
> language
> for scripting in a Win32 based framework program for acquisition and VBA
> scripting in a VB program for analysis. We decided to rewrite the whole
> thing in C#+.Net4+IronPython.
>
> On stackoverflow, someone asked about using Iron* vs PowerShell for
> scripting in a C# application in light of Microsoft's changing
> committment.
> This was my answer:
> > I'm in a similar position.
> > I decided to use IronPython scripting but ever since I saw Anders
> Hejlsberg's
> > talk "The Future of C#", I've had a feeling IronPython was doomed.
> >
> > It was in Microsoft's interest to get the DLR developed but they
> ultimately
> > want us to use tools and languages they control. After all,
> aren't you
> using
> > C# and not Java? So what will a Microsoft dynamic language look
> like? How
> > about dynamic, interpreted C# (Iron C#)? Hejlsberg's talk made it
> clear it
>
> > isn't that far away. He even had a console window with a REPL
> interface.
> > That said, there's always a possibility for Iron VB. Talk about
> closing
> the
> > loop.
> >
> > On the plus side for us programmers, Iron C# also solves another
> problem
> that
> > I'm having trouble with -- the existence of two parallel object
> environments,
> > one of .Net objects, one of Python objects. It takes work to get
> from one
> to
> > the other. I assume an Iron C# would utilize the .Net class
> structure.
> >
> > My advice: Stick with Iron Python and .Net classes. When Iron VB
> or Iron
> C#
> > happens, it'll be a quick, maybe automatic, language translation.
> Besides,
>
> > if enough of us use IronPython, Microsoft may change their mindset.
>
> So my question to you is a) am I thinking correctly about the future of
> IronPython, and 2) if not IronPython, what scripting language should
> I be
> considering for a .Net C# application? I should let you know I'm also
> considering switching to Qt/PyQt/Cpython.
>
> Thanks for your input.
> Max
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com <mailto:Users at lists.ironpython.com>
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
More information about the Ironpython-users
mailing list