[IronPython] IronPython / DLR Direction

Thu Aug 12 16:24:29 CEST 2010

Let's not push Dino or Bill to say anything; This is a enough of a
high-profile issue that I'm sure Microsoft's PR firms are working on this.
Unfortunately, we'll just have to be patient.

~Jimmy

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Eyvind Axelsen
<eyvind.axelsen at profdoc.no>wrote:

>  So, no response from the IPY team on this issue?
>
>
>
> Eyvind.
>
>
>
> *Fra:* users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:
> users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] *På vegne av* yngipy hernan
> *Sendt:* 10. august 2010 05:46
> *Til:* Discussion of IronPython
> *Emne:* Re: [IronPython] IronPython / DLR Direction
>
>
>
> I completely agree with IPy being Microsoft-supported lowers the barrier of
> entry to enterprise use. I have this problem long time back using Python as
> the company is a Microsoft shop (mostly). But IronPython being Microsoft
> pretty much is approved already, no question ask.
>
>
>
> I am hoping to hear that IronPython will be supported by MS in the next 2
> to 5 years or longer ( forever :-) ) if possible.
>
>
>
> -yngipy
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Hank Fay <hank at prosysplus.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Tony,
>
>
>
> I have to agree about the barrier being lower if IPy is Microsoft-supported
> (as all the Iron* languages were announced to be).  I had a discussion in
> January with a market-leader in another country, and their project manager
> could accept IronPython, barely.  His take was: I want to be able to easily
> hire programmers for customization and/or sourcecode escrow clause
> necessity.  Customization wasn't really an issue (the program uses hooks for
> customization), as he could hire his bevy of C# developers to do that, but
> if he had to maintain sourcecode that would be a different story.
>
>
>
> Having come from a very productive dynamic language (Visual FoxPro) that MS
> first said could not be ported to .Net, and then when it obviously was
> possible (in 2005) made no attempt to do so, I'm having a deja vu experience
> all over again.  I'll try not to be as cynical and sarcastic as last time,
> but I'm having to hold my arm down (shades of Dr. Strangelove) and hold my
> tongue to prevent shouting out "Middle Management Uber Alles!" (referencing
> Jimmy's blog post).
>
>
>
> And so it goes...
>
>
>
> Hank
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Tony Meyer <tony.meyer at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Jeff Hardy <jdhardy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > if [Iron*] die, doesn't that mean MS made the right choice after all?
>
> I don't think that's true.  .NET isn't just another platform - it's
> Microsoft's own platform.  Some thoughts:
>
> Like it or not, and whether it *should* be the case or not, in many
> organisations (or even teams) if a technology is from Microsoft then
> it's automatically approved, or at least much easier to approve.  The
> barrier to using Iron* is much lower because they are Microsoft
> products - this is even more the case with Visual Studio integration.
>
> Although Iron* are open-source (which is great, obviously), they
> aren't typical open-source communities, because of the (somewhat
> understandable) restriction about accepting code, and the leadership
> all (AFAIK) being within Microsoft.  Microsoft have created this
> environment (which has worked fairly well so far), and it's not clear
> how easily that can transition to something that's lead by someone (or
> ones) outside of Microsoft.
>
> Leadership (or at least involvement) within Microsoft opens
> opportunities for Iron* development to influence .NET.  I'm not overly
> familiar with the details, but I gather than the DLR approach is
> significantly superior to the IPy 1 CLR approach, and that some of the
> new dynamic features of C# have benefited from this.  It's hard to see
> how a community IronPython could have developed the DLR, and it seems
> unlikely that Microsoft would make changes to the CLR to assist it.
> (Does the latest Microsoft Javascript engine use the DLR (Managed
> JScript?) - if so, then there's hope, I guess).
>
> Projects often need 'angels', especially in the early stages (and I
> would argue that Iron* are still in early stages).  Working on a
> project of this size takes a lot of resources, and having corporate
> sponsors makes that a lot easier.  Would Python have succeeded if CWI,
> CNRI, and BeOpen hadn't supported Guido (and others)'s work in the
> early days?  These days the PSF takes this role, but projects need
> time to build to that sort of size.
>
> [Iron]Python (I don't really know much about [Iron]Ruby) is a great
> language for beginners (students, kids, hobbyists, etc).  The Iron
> variants provide a very smooth path into other .NET development (e.g.
> C# - which I would say is not at all a great beginner's language).
> You could argue that Visual Basic provides this functionality as well
> - I personally find Python much superior to Visual Basic, and since
> nearly all other BASIC variants are dead now, it doesn't provide an
> easy road into the .NET world (you have to start there with an
> unfamiliar language).
>
> This last point is the most relevant to me.  Over the last few years,
> NorthTec have switched to using CPython as the first-course
> programming language, and IronPython as the second-course language.
> The students *need* to end up with some .NET and Visual Studio
> experience, because realistically that's what they are most likely to
> come across in the real world.  Many of the students are not capable
> of starting with C#.  If IronPython wasn't a Microsoft project, it
> would have been considerably more difficult to adopt it - that would
> likely have meant using Visual Basic (possibly in both courses,
> because these students struggle learning two languages in their first
> year).  Although this is my unique case, I suspect that there are
> similar ones, where being a Microsoft product is a deciding factor in
> whether Iron* can be used (which then impacts the adoption of the
> language, and therefore whether the language survives).
>
>
> > I think Microsoft is throwing their weight behind JavaScript as their
> > dynamic language of choice, and I can't really blame them.
>
> My hope is that Microsoft realises they have enough weight to throw it
> in more than once place.
>
> (My longer hope, which I know is quite unlikely, is that Windows 8 or
> 9 includes some version of Iron* out of the box, like OS X includes
> Python/Perl/PHP/Ruby/etc.  Being able to distribute .py[co] files
> rather than .exes would significantly help Iron* adoption IMO (and
> this is something completely impossible for a non-Microsoft Iron*).  I
> know some people must like PowerShell and similar things could be done
> with it, but it's not the same as having a language with the power and
> cross-platform nature of Python).
>
> Cheers,
> Tony
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20100812/617355f4/attachment.html>