Python Evangelism

[Terry Hancock]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:33:38 -0500
"Thomas G. Willis" <tom.willis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/9/06, Terry Hancock <hancock at anansispaceworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 10:33:12 -0500
> > "Thomas G. Willis" <tom.willis at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I get particulalry annoyed now with linux when I start
> > > up synaptic and my choices are cluttered with several
> > > programs who might help me in some way, but the only
> > > difference described in the description is that they
> > > were implemented in language XXX.  I don't really
> > > consider that a choice, it's more noise than anything.
> >
> > Well, it's a matter of audience. I like to know what
> > language programs are written in because I might want to
> > modify them, and I don't feel equally confident in every
> > language.  A program written in C is less "open" to me
> > personally than one written in Python (even though C is
> > something I have used). A program written in Lisp or
> > Prolog might as well be closed source for my purposes --
> > I'd have as much luck begging the developers to make
> > changes as to attempt them myself.
> >
> > This is a non-issue for programs that already "just
> > work", which is why a utility like bittorrent needn't
> > bother advertising its language.  It also can be a
> > red-herring if a language is written in C or Java, but
> > has an excellent Python scripting environment.
> >
> > So, while I can appreciate that it may seem like noise
> > to someone who never imagines tinkering with the sources
> > and it isn't a 100% indicator of what I want to know,
> > it can be really useful to tinkerers (and it shouldn't
> > be surprising that tinkerers design a system that's good
> > for tinkerers).
> >
> > There are of course, desktop distributions that cut all
> > that cruft down to "best of breed" applications for the
> > end user.
> >
> I see your points Terry. And I understand the need for
> tinkerers and the value of knowing what options are
> available in a given language.
> 
> But, I  think relying on the language as a selling
> point/feature is short sighted. I can't recall any program
> that has gained mass acceptance  who's selling point was
> "written in ..."

That makes sense if the author's objective is "mass
acceptance". But that's not what you get "paid" for on
an open source project.

Payment -- in the form of contributions to your project --
occurs because you attract people who share your interest
in working on the code.

Of course, this really depends a lot on who the author is,
and what their motivations were in creating the package.

But in the classic "scratch an itch"/"single developer
working in their spare time" scenario, it's pretty 
common.

It's also probably a bit much to expect "savvy marketing"
from said back room developer. ;-)

It helps if you think of it as a "swap meet" instead
of a "department store". :-)

> In the case of language evangelism, It'd be nice if kick
> ass programs were produced that revolutionized computing
> and how people communicate. If they were written in a
> language that I already know and can extend if I desire,
> even better.  if the equation were flipped and it was just
> a program written in a language I know, but does not do
> anything of value for me that isn't already fulfilled
> elsewhere, then it essentially holds no value.

That would be true if programs were atomic.  But it
quite frequently happens that a program which provides
a "mundane" piece of programming infrastructure (say
an email client) is a useful part to add to that
"revolutionary" application that you've been tinkering
with for the last few months.

Anyway, I think most of us are into evolution more than
revolution. The latter is more newsworthy, but the former
is where most of the action is most of the time.  Kind
of like any field in science or engineering. :-)

> why did you reply to me instead of the list?

Thumbfingered, I guess. ;-)  I've responded to both and
left myself quoted.  Normally, my client *does* respond
automatically to the list, I'm not sure why it didn't
this time.

Cheers,
Terry

-- 
Terry Hancock (hancock at AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com