Pythonwin and .NET

[Mark Hammond]

Alex Martelli wrote:

>         ...
> I think you're confusing "what shows on the outside of a component" (which 
> is constrained by CRL rules, etc) with what goes on inside it.  I want to 
> use Python (and others will want Eiffel, or Cobol, or Mercury, etc) because 
> I am convinced it gives me incredibly good productivity to implement and 
> consume those externally-constrained interfaces.  I may want to use Python 
> on .NET, or on the JVM, or with COM, etc, if and when deployment issues 
> make that preferable to (e.g.) classic Python with C/API extensions -- it's 
> as simple as that.


I agree 100% for the few excellent programmers out there, and also for 
the "shrink-wrapped component" authors.  However, the majority of 
programmers really know only a few languages with a high degree of 
competence - I know that I do.  I am very unlikely to write code in 
either Mercury or Cobol (or even Perl :).  A software house selling a 
component certainly may choose to, but most users - especially those in 
the large corporate shops - will not, and will stick with 1-3 languages.

Python should have a place here, but this newsgroup is preaching to the 
choir.  Python already has excellent Win32 integration capabilities - so 
I am unsure what about .NET will suddenly make Python more visible or 
viable on Windows than the existing Python+COM has.

> Sure, many shops won't get it, and will happily go on Cobol'ing or 
> whatever.  Think of it as evolution in action, as Niven and/or Pournelle 
> used to say:-).  If my competitors get half my productivity because they 
> prefer to use other languages, _I_ am not gonna complain:-).


Again, I agree 100%.  However, this exact same option is available to 
them today.  I am not sure I see anything in .NET that makes Python 
*more* attractive than it already is on Windows, and can see a few 
things that make it less attractive on V1 than C# and VB for .NET, for 
example.

> No, but you're just as certainly *the* guy with the most experience merging 
> Python and .NET at this point in time, so your opinion carries enormous 
> weight (and well it should!).  Should one be able to sway your opinion, the 
> prospects of Python on .NET might well change for the better;-).

I may have given the wrong impression here :)  I believe .NET is very 
cool, and Python is very cool.  But I don't really see much in the 
marriage of Python and .NET that suddenly creates a whole greater than 
the sum of the parts.

And on the more pragmatic side, there is still *significant* work 
remaining to be done before Python on .NET is really viable, and I know 
of no commercial effort underway to implement this.  From memory, 
JPython took a number of years to be considered viable and to transform 
into Jython.

Mark.