[IronPython] Iron Python Library Usage

[Martin Maly]

Hi Ray,

Thanks for your compliments, we are happy that you find IronPython
useful.

You are right, there are many built-in modules missing or incomplete in
IronPython 0.9.
Our focus for 0.9 was interoperability with .Net and between 0.9 and 1.0
we are going to invest a lot into making CPython and IronPython
compatible in terms of using the same libraries, making sure that
CPython regression test suite runs well on IronPython, that programs
written in Python language that run well on CPython run also on
IronPython.

Out of your two "a" and "b" scenarios, we are planning on providing both
and I hope we succeed. You bring up a good point with strings. If I am a
.Net programmer and want to use string, I may want to see the .Net
methods on the string object, i.e:

"hi".ToUpper()

whereas a Python programmer coming to IronPython could very well prefer
to see the standard Python way:

"hi".upper()

It is not obvious how to approach this, but definitely our goal is to
make sure that we stay true to the Python lanugage and its libraries and
as I said, it is our focus from now on to make progress on the libraries
and built-in modules etc.

I hope this answers your question,

Martin
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: users-ironpython.com-bounces at lists.ironpython.com 
> [mailto:users-ironpython.com-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] On 
> Behalf Of Ray Djajadinata
> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 10:51 PM
> To: users-ironpython.com at lists.ironpython.com
> Subject: [IronPython] Iron Python Library Usage
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I wanted to say how great it is to hear about Iron Python 
> because that means I can develop for .NET in my favourite 
> language, just like I can write Java program in it as well, 
> but... let me just ask my question :)
> 
> I found that in Iron Python 0.9, a lot of modules that we've 
> come to expect to see are not implemented yet--which is OK 
> cos we've already got the whole .NET library already. 
> 
> But my question is, how is Iron Python meant to be used 
> eventually? Is it:
> 
> a. like Visual J++ for Java programmers, so you're using the 
> familiar Java syntax to make use of .NET library? (e.g.: to 
> do some string operations, we should use .NET String instead 
> of importing the string
> module)
> 
> b. meant to give the programmer an ability to run their 
> (C)Python scripts unmodified on .NET? That is, if you want to 
> do some string stuff, import string (which may be implemented 
> using .NET String underneath), instead of importing System to 
> make use of .NET's String?
> 
> Even if right now we have to do with a mix of both 
> approaches, surely there's a vision behind this that will 
> favor one of them eventually?
> 
> Thank you,
> Ray
>