[Python-ideas] Making Python more enterprise technology

[Mark Summerfield]

On 2010-05-11, David Stanek wrote:
> 2010/5/9 Filip Gruszczyński <gruszczy at gmail.com>:
> > For some reason Python seems not to be seen as an enterprise
> > technology unlike Java or .net. Do you think there any steps that
> > could be taken, to change this opinion? I love Python, but all job
> > offers I can find at the moment are web development. At my company we
> > use Python a lot, but that's only because my lead is a very sensible
> > person and sees python potential and me and my friend are python
> > enthusiasts. Anyway, beside one Python + Qt project we mostly use
> > Django for projects. How can this be changed? What Python is lacking?
> 
> I believe that marketing, or lack of, has played a big role in
> Python's acceptance. Java and C# have a big advantage by being
> promoted so heavily by large, well-known companies. When I talk to
> people I know in the enterprise space they don't understand exactly
> what Python is or what it can be.
> 
> The pointy haired managers know that in a pinch they can get Java/C#
> guys because there are so many. Outsourcing (I personally don't like)
> is also much easier  with Java/C#.

As far as I'm aware no big company specifically promoted or promotes C++
(apart from those selling commercial compilers & related tools), yet C++
is still very widely used. Naturally, C++'s C-compatibility has been a
big help, but most languages nowadays are C compatible (at least as far
as being able to access C functions inside C libraries, and this
includes Python of course).

I think that one of the big wins for C++ (and C) was ISO
standardization. Companies that use C++ know that they can get compliant
compilers which gives them long term confidence that C++ is safe to
invest in. (Of course Pascal is also standardized, and it hasn't helped
the language at all.)

Unfortunately, C++ has developed at a glacial pace in the last decade,
with a much too long gap between standards. (They are hoping to get the
gap down to five years _after_ the 2011 or 2012 standard is ratified!) 

If Python were to be standardized it would become much more visible and
a much safer corporate bet. Such a process wouldn't be easy and I doubt
anyone would want to update the standard too often.

One possible way would be to standardize one particular version, but not
the next two minor releases. For example, standardize 3.2, but not 3.3
or 3.4, then standardize 3.5, but not 3.6 or 3.7, and so on. This would
mean that the standardization effort would take place about every four
years (and which would only affect those involved in the standardization
process). There would however, be a cost to the development community:
maintaining the standardized version (e.g., bug & security fixes) until
it is superceded.

My 2c on "enterprise" Python;-)

-- 
Mark Summerfield, Qtrac Ltd, www.qtrac.eu
    C++, Python, Qt, PyQt - training and consultancy
        "Advanced Qt Programming" - ISBN 0321635906