Arguments for using Python

[Aahz]

In article <aud4gr$75d$1 at news8.svr.pol.co.uk>,
Duncan Smith <buzzard at urubu.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>             I've been developing some prototype software for a government
>organisation.  It is almost entirely in Python.  But it now (after I've done
>most of the work) appears that they would prefer it to be written in Java or
>C.  Most of the guys in the organisation use C, but it's not the fact that
>they don't know Python that is really the problem.  They are very 'security
>conscious' and don't install new software on their network without good
>reason.  I can think of a few 'good' reasons, like 'I don't know much C (or
>any Java)'; 'the code will bloat'; 'Python's more readable / maintainable';
>'I really need OOP and I don't get that with C' etc.  But I need to put
>together a document to convince them that installing Python on their network
>is 'safe' (and a generally good idea in any case).  I'll do the usual
>googling, but if anyone has any compelling reasons / examples that would
>help my case, they'd be much appreciated.  Maybe there's an argument in the
>fact that Python is Open Source and the core is written in a language of
>which they already approve?  BTW, I make heavy use of Numeric and gmpy.  Any
>ideas welcome.  Cheers.

Expanding on Roy's response: Tell them to read comp.security.announce.
Ask them how many of those applications are written in C/C++, and how
many of the security holes are caused by buffer problems.  They should
also be familiar with comp.risks if they're going to argue about
security issues.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"I disrespectfully agree."  --SJM