Announcing PyCs, a new Python-like language on .Net

[Mark Hahn]

On 1 Sep 2004 06:33:57 -0700, Anand Pillai wrote:

> Some questions...
> 
> o How "Python-like" is your new language ?

The list is long but things like it's simple syntax, modules, generator
expressions, etc.

> o How does it differ from Mark Hammond's Python for .NET ?

Totally different.

> o How does it differ from Jim Hugunin's IronPython ?

IronPython is an implementation of the compatible current Python on .Net
except for the libraries.  PyCs is more like Python 3000 in that it is
incompatible, with advanced Python features.  The advanced features are
from Prothon (mostly fixes of Python gotcha's) and from C-Omega.

> o You say "PyCs is the first dynamic language to have all the
> capabilities of C# and PyCs can be programmed quickly and easily in an
> interactive way like its predecessor Python." When I have Python, tell
> me what other "dynamic" features does PyCS add? Anyway Python is
> already dynamic, interactive and all that.

Yes Python is already dynamic.  The sentence you quote is saying that PyCs
is the first dynamic version of C#.  I admit I need to work on my marketing
skills.  PyCs is just Python extended to include the features from C# that
improve Python.  In doing so it also gives people from the C# world their
first dynamic version of C#.  It is a fusion of the two.  It turns out they
had a lot of overlap to begin with.  They both have many similarities.  The
have identical for-in constructs, lists, dictionaries, etc.

> o What all features do you plan to borrow from C Sharp? In other
> words, is this C# on Python or Python on C# ?

It is both.  To see the feature list go to out wiki: http://pycs.org/wiki.

> o Why do you need another language just to have the SQL/XML features
>   of some X#? Why not just add it as an optimizing module like Psyco
> does ?

If you read the paper you will see the cool features of X# are only
available when built into the language.  And they ARE really cool.

> o You say PyCS is not compatible with Python, yet Python and C# code
> can be
>   ported to it. Why in the world should I decide to do something like
> that, if
>   my Python and C# code works well enough for me? What *new* thing
> does PyCS
>   bring in?

PyCs brings in a lot of new things.  It fixes most of the well-known
gotcha's of Python.  It adds features from C-Omega.  I have no idea why you
personally would switch.  That is a decision you will have to make.

> o PyCS is basd on Prothon. Prothon, never completed was Prototypes +
> Python.
>   PyCS is Python + CSharp, but not compatible with Python. ..... To me
> it looks
>   like the one thing PyCS borrowed from Python is the "Py" prefix,
> nothing else.

Prothon was a lot more than Python plus prototypes.  The wiki has a list of
what comes from Python, Prothon, and C-Omega.

> o PyCS is called Pisces... Now it is pixie... 
>   Excuse me, are we talking of  magical pixie-dust here?

I don't understand the question.  Is this just degenerating into
name-calling here?

> o Quoting from your website, "We had a tough challenge with Prothon, a
> prototype-based language, being implemented on top of Python", yet you
> say that Prothon is incompatible with Python. Help me, I am confused
> here.

I shouldn't have said "on top of".  That is incorrect.  I'm sorry for the
confusion.  Even if we did implement it on top of Python I don't see why
that would make you think it should be compatible though.