Why Python is like BASIC (and why this is a good thing)

[Philip Swartzleonard]

Robin Munn || Fri 15 Feb 2002 10:59:13a: 

> [Lots of stuff] 
> 
> * Batteries included. This is the big one, which makes Python more
> than just a toy language suitable for learning. The richness of the
> standard library makes Python incredibly useful, and I for one would
> like to see it continue to grow. I understand the concern that
> people developing Python-based programs for distribution would like
> their users to be able to run a 100k script without downloading a
> 10M distribution, but I don't want to see that cause a reduction in
> the standard library. Instead, we could make make two Python
> distributions, a "full" install containing everything and a "lite"
> install containing only the interpreter and maybe -- *maybe* -- a
> couple of essential modules like os and sys. Then people developing
> Python programs like, say, a pygame-based game, could distribute a
> single package containing the "Python lite" distribution, their own
> code, and any other modules their code depended on -- all in one
> easy-for-the-end-used-to-install package.

Well, using Installer, i've got something a little like this 'lite' 
design you're talking about. I've got a exe that contains all of the 
modules and dlls and stuff I need (4 megs with onefile), and a script 
which runs the real script via execfile. So i can distribute my script 
app, and say 'either get python 2.2, pyopengl+context, wxpython, 
numeric, pil, and maybe some other stuff, or download this exe, put it 
in the app directory, and run IT'. It can also read a config file to get 
the name of the file to exec, so you don't have to recompile it to 
change that.

-- 
Philip Sw "Starweaver" [rasx] :: www.rubydragon.com 
"and-i'll-prolly-put-something-that-uses-this-up-later-today... GACK, 
been reading this group to long =)"