Python does not play well with others

[azrael]

you have to undestand that python is not like other languages. I am
working wih it for 3 months. in this time i learned more than throgh
c, c++, java or php. you take. what the hell is php. a language
developed primary for webaplications. take zope and you have the same.
besides that zope will do fantastic things crossing with other
modules.
c and c++ are incredible languages and if i am not wrong, c is the way
to make aplications working on minimum time (not including assembler).
it has been developed for quite a long time and the researches have
been sponsored even from the goverments. the development of php is
continued while Rasmus Lerdorf is working for yahoo. the python
comunity is not so big as the php (at least in my country), but such
people like me, who fell in love with python, we work on our projects,
we know what we want, and if it dosn't work we make it work. I ma
working on a project and had no filters i needed for signal processing
so I wrote it. My next step when they are finished and work well is to
send it to the admins from pil. this is open source, and we help each
others.

thats open source.

you try python and you like it or not, you keep using it or not. if
something dosn't work, be so kind and make it work, but please, don't
expect someone else to do your "homework". If there are some problems,
contact the admins and offer them your help.



















On Jan 25, 6:17 pm, John Nagle <n... at animats.com> wrote:
> Paul Boddie wrote:
> > On 25 Jan, 12:01, "Ben Sizer" <kylo... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I think that is why many of the SIGs are stagnant, why the standard library
> >> has so much fluff yet still lacks in key areas such as multimedia and web
> >> development, etc.
> > ... I think this is also a good insight into why things are as they are
> > within the core development section of the community, although one can wonder
> > what some people actively developing the language are actually doing with it
> > if they are satisfied with the state of some of the standard library
> > solutions. However, there are lots of factors which motivate people and the
> > proliferation (or otherwise) of solutions to common problems: whether one
> > develops one's own solutions as separate projects and/or tries to push for a
> > consensus, whether one cares about other people using such solutions, whether
> > one aspires to contributing to the standard library.
>
> > Over the years, people have tended towards building their own communities
> > around their projects rather than attempting to engage the wider Python
> > community, and I think a motivation behind that has been the intractability
> > of improving parts of the standard library.
>
>     Yes.  Working on "frameworks" is perceived as cooler than working
> on libraries.  Things like Ruby on Rails, Struts, Zope, and Twisted
> get attention.  There are papers and conferences on these things.
> It's hard to get people excited about overhauling
> the CGI library, or making mod_python work securely in shared-hosting
> environments.
>
>     The key distinction between a framework and a library is that users
> are expected to make their code fit the framework.  In particular,
> frameworks aren't expected to play well with each other.  If you need
> something from Zope and something from Twisted, you're probably not
> going to be able to make it work.  Libraries, on the other hand,
> are expected to play well together.  Which means that they have to
> handle the hard cases correctly, not just the easy ones.
>
>
>
> > True. It also doesn't address the issue of development priorities and their
> > role in defining the platform's own standards
> ...
> > I do wonder whether the interests of language/runtime project developers
> > eventually become completely aligned with the needs of such projects, making
> > things like "multimedia and web development" seem irrelevant, uninteresting
> > or tangential. This has worrying implications for the perceived relevance of
> > Python with regard to certain kinds of solutions, despite the wealth of
> > independently produced libraries available for the language.
>
>     Something like that happened to the C++ standards committee.
> The committee was captured by the template fanatics, and most new
> standards work involves doing computation at compile time via template
> expansion.   That's seldom done in production code, yet most of the
> standards effort is devoted to making cool template hacks work better.
> Meanwhile, real problems, like doing something about memory leaks and buffer
> overflows, are ignored by the C++ committee.  As a result, C++ is
> being displaced by Java and C#, which don't have elaborate templates but do have
> memory safety.
>
>     I'm not sure how the Python development community will deal with this
> problem.  But what's happened in the C++ standards world has clearly
> been very bad for users of the language.  Learn from the mistakes there.
>
>     My main concern is with glue code to major packages.  The connections
> to OpenSSL, MySQL, and Apache (i.e. mod_python) all exist, but have major
> weaknesses.  If you're doing web applications, those are standard pieces
> which need to work right.  There's a tendency to treat those as abandonware
> and re-implement them as event-driven systems in Twisted.  Yet the
> main packages aren't seriously broken.  It's just that the learning curve
> to make a small fix to any of them is substantial, so nobody new takes
> on the problem.
>
>                                 John Nagle
>                                 Animats