Could Python supplant Java?

[ET]

"goose" <spammenotguse at hobbiton.org> wrote in message
news:3D640BCE.4090201 at hobbiton.org...
> Dan Johnson wrote:
> <snip>
> > Serious question:
> >
> > What is so developer-hostile about Windows?
> >
>
> Serious Answer(tm):
> 1. No development tools come installed with it. Without
> even a single compiler, how does a "developer" develop ?
> The result is usually to download/purchase a development
> tool.
>

Actually, there are developer tools that come with Windows.  Your statement
clearly indicates that you haven't a clue about what you are talking about.
Of course, your comment implies that there aren't any free tools that you
can get either - often times the same as what you find on those *nix boxes.

> 2. No proper scripting environment to do nightly
> build & test cycles (cron'd to run at midnight).

Gee, guess the scheduler and such are all in my imagination.   Ever tried
the AT command?  No, didn't think so.

> (IDE's are nice if you're gonna sit at your desk and click
> on the buttons, but on a 20 person project, I want to be
> able to get everyone to save their work to a server, and
> have *everything* recompiled from scratch, so that if
> anyone made a change that broke someone else component, we'd
> find out the next morning, not six weeks later when we are
> trying to integrate our code together). The lack of a system
> provided make utility is depressing.
>

And the lack of your having even basic knowledge of Windows is pathetic
given your attacks against it.

> 3. The inability to easily let everyone use *the* *same* *machine*
> to compile, all at the same time (via an ssh shell, or an xterm
> if the developer likes GUI IDE's). This way it is possible to make
> sure that no developer is using a compiler which could possibly
> be patched to a different version than the others (autoupdate?).
>

Gee, you don't know how to do this on Windows?   Again, you demonstrate your
ignorance.   Of course, alternatively, you could be smart and have the dev
environment installed to a shared location so that there is only the one
version that has to be managed and you wouldn't have everyone constantly
stepping on each other's development process.

> 4. The lack of a single decent editor ... 'nuff said.
>

Yes, the hundreds of editors that are available for Windows does add what
would appear to be too much flexibility and capability for you to handle.
Since you clearly don't know Windows, you clearly don't even know about the
programming editors included either.

> Basicly, after you jump the flaming hoops to install your OS,
> it is frustrating to sit in front of it without being able to
> write a single line of code because the OS assumes that the
> person using it is not a developer. No other system that I've
> installed has this "feature" ... the first thing I do after an
> installation is run 'cc -v' ... and everthing from linux to
> sco to solaris to iris allows me to start writing code.
>

The difference is that those other systems are practically useless for work
without the constant need to compile your own stuff.  On Windows, the apps
to do what you want already exist in binary form and don't need to be
re-compiled locally in order to run.  But you knew that.  Of course, if all
you want is a compiler, there are many available for free - even some from
MS.

> Windows lets me play solitaire :-(
>

Sure that's not too much for you to handle?

>
> > Are you sure it isn't really Microsoft you find.. hostile? :D
>
> no, I can stand solitaire for a few minutes while my
> development tools load :-)
>

*few minutes*????  Guess you must be using one of those overpriced but slow
*nix boxes if it takes that long.