dont laugh

[Alex Martelli]

"Ian Hobson" <ian.hobson at ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3nnlqLA$F4s5EwZ5 at ntlworld.com...
    [snip]
> >Similarly, if a program "MUST" (uppercase) be pre-installed,
> >or else stand zero chance to be taught, it must be a peculiar
> >program indeed.  99.7% of programs (including programming
    [snip]
> >I think describing this thesis as "poppycock" would be slightly
> >too charitable and urbane, so I'll refrain from expressing what
    [snip]
> I do not care for being quoted out of context, and them dammed for what
> I did not say. I think it is downright rude, ill mannered and self
> serving and offensive.

You said:

> >Python MUST run "out of the box" (even on win32 - which it does not) >

i.e., you explicitly said that Python does not run "out of the box"
on Win32.  I responded claiming that, yes, it does.  Somebody else
tried to answer that by implying that "out of the box" implies being
pre-installed with the operating system (as Python is on some Linux
distributions), and I rebutted that.  One may choose to maintain that
"out of the box" means pre-installed with the OS, but then the "MUST"
here-quoted becomes laughable; or, one may choose to mean something
else, but then the "it does not" is counterfactual.

So, your quoted sentence is wrong in one of two ways -- you get to
decide which way, by redefining "out of the box" appropriately, but
you just can't make it factually correct and sensible.

> >and then the ideas can be explained.
>
> When I installed Python, it would only run scripts in one directory,
> and, being clean of habit, I had placed my source in a special source
> directory. Paths and associations need to be set up.

As I explained, when you install a distribution packaged for Windows,
either the standard 1.5.2 one or the ActiveState one currently built
on 1.6b1, it *does* set everything up so that *Python* runs "out of
the box" -- in the normal sense in which Windows users start most any
program: Start/Programs/ActivePython/PythonWin, or similar GUI nav
for the CNRI distribution.

>From the GUI of PythonWin, it's easy to open Python scripts that
reside in any directory -- again, you navigate through the usual
Common File Dialog of Windows.  From the console-mode Python shell,
since it's not a GUI application, you have to handle directory
paths more explicitly, of course; but then, it's clearly simpler
to start with the GUI, and that will be the typical preference of
Windows users, so I think that's quite adequate for Python newbies,
with no 'MUST' warranted.  Python's ideas can quite well be
explained in the PythonWin environment.

Python *SCRIPTS* (as opposed to Python itself) may or may not "run
out of the box", outside of interactive Python environments,
depending on exactly how the installer sets things up.  If THIS
is what you meant [that Python SCRIPTS should 'run out of the box',
rather than, as you said, *PYTHON* iself so running], you might
have better advised to say what you meant, rather than what you
didn't mean.  We could then debate the pro's and con's of each
option.  Personally, I prefer the default association of Python
scripts to be with the *editor* (PythonWin) rather than with
*running* the script; most of my .py files are not meant to be
run directly, but, rather, imported as modules.  When I do want
to run a script, a suitable shortcut is preferable (it lets me
do various other useful things, such as setting the starting
directory); or, from the command line, then explicitly saying
    C:\mydir> python \py\foo.py
is my normal preference, rather than using start (just saying
foo.py can be made to work on NT, or on smarter shell, but
just can't work on Windows' default, dumb "command.com").

A newbie would be ill-advised to start worrying about such
choices, I agree -- but, would said Python newbie be well
advised in the first place to be worrying about execution at
the command line, at all...?  Commandlines seem to be
increasingly out of fashion, as many Windows users have
never had to struggle with bare DOS (or have forgotten
about how they did).  If somebody's advanced enough to
work at the commandline prompt, I think they're advanced
enough to use the explicit form -- and to know about Windows'
PATH (I *detest* applications that add their directories
to my PATH -- far too many do, and it overcrowds that very
limited 'space', so I have to clean it up manually...).


> I said nothing about pre-installation.

Somebody else did, no doubt because your "out of the box"
chosen expression could be construed as ambiguous.  But
I'm glad that we seem to agree that pre-installation of
Python as a part of Windows is not a sine qua non of being
able to teach people about Python, because I very strongly
doubt that pre-installation can ever happen...


Alex