[IronPython] Is any one use IronPython in your project?
sh at defuze.org
Thu Nov 23 11:13:36 CET 2006
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>>> sounds like you're confusing "Python" with "the stuff I get when I download
>>> the CPython 2.5 installer from python.org". don't do that; it only muddles the
>>> water for people who can distinguish between a language and a given im-
>>> plementation of it, and scares away people who haven't used either Python
>> I don't muddle anything. But you are being harsh.
>> If IP was only meant for .NET developers to move to dynamic languages
>> such as Python then either the project is half useful or you've missed
> you're stuck in the "Python is CPython 2.5 as packaged by python.org"
> mode of thinking. snap out of it.
It's funny because then you are tsuck in the .NET as framework mode of
thinking since the beginning of this thread. Not once have you mentioned
C# or Vb#.
So one hand you don't want people to mix between Python the language and
Python the environment but you quite happily do it with .NET.
>> IP has a platform will only achieve its goal if it allows Python
>> developers to try the .NET environment AND if .NET developers understand
>> that some things are much easier with the Python environment
> it's not obvious to me that Python's standard library is, in any way,
> better than
> the DotNet standard library. it's obvious that the Python language is
> better than
> other languages for lots of tasks.
I did not say the stdlib was better than the .NET framework I said it
was also part of Python's (the language) success. Python without its
stdlib would not have arrived where it is now without it IMO. So the
fact IP does not support it really well in a 1.0 release is annoying *to
>> Funny enough what has made Python a success is also its stdlib.
> the standard library was a lot more important when Python was competing with
> languages didn't have extensive standard libraries too.
>> Given that ElementTree is now part of that same stdlib I assume you know that
>> it will make it an even bigger success.
> as of 1.2.7, ElementTree also supports IronPython 1.0 natively, right out of the
> box. thanks to careful design of the XMLReader stuff in the DotNet standard
> library, and careful modular design on the ET side of things. took me minutes
> to find the right DotNet API, and figure out how to use it. I'm not
> sure I can say
> the same about many Python XML API:s.
You are right. It took me no time to incorporate it into bridge either.
But so what? I mean what do you proove? In my previous message I said
the goal of IP was to allow people to use the best of *both* world.
Have you noticed how painful it was to serialize to a string from
XmlWriter while it was a one line job in xml.dom. I agree this is thanks
to the Python language but
Again I agree with you. Not everything in the stdlib is great but
neither is the .NET framework (and I have worked on a large project with
.NET and C#... not everything is great and I wish I had had IP back then).
>>> (and what's the point running your existing Python stuff on IronPython? don't
>>> you already have CPython for that purpose? what I love with IronPython is all
>>> the *new* things I can do with it, and all the *new* projects I can bring Python
>>> into. not that I get yet another platform to run my old crap on.)
>> That's stupid reasoning I'm sorry.
>> The all point is to be able to use the best of both worlds and you only
>> look at one side.
> I could have sworn that *I* was the one who said that IronPython success-
> fully fuses Python the language with DotNet the platform, and you were the
> one who kept repeating that "CPython is the one true Python, and Iron-
> Python is not CPython, so it's broken", but maybe I missed some post in
> this thread.
No you just want to read what you want to read and make me look like the
daft Python coder who has just arrived into the game.
I will repeat it. IP goal should be to allow developers of both sides to
see how to make the best of both environments
> doesn't matter, really:
It does not matter but you like showing it, don't you?
among my customers, IronPython has done more for
> Python's visibility and marketability than *any* other Python project in recent
> times, and I'm learning a *lot* from integrating IronPython in existing DotNet
> projects. I could of course ignore that, and sit in a corner by
> myself muttering
> that "it's not real Python, and they're not using it the right way, so why are
> they so darn happy with it" in a Homer Simpson voice, but that would be more
> religion than engineering, and it would definitely not be Pythonic.
For Christ's sake. Did you even read what I said?
I never said IP was a bastard project not worth the penny. I said that
in its current state it was limited. Right maybe it could only be for my
sole purpose and not the whole Python community. I'll give you that. But
when did I say that Python was the one and only? Stop making others look
like they are the bad guys please. This is annoying.
Where I wholeheartedly agree with you however is on the positive impact
IP had on Python itself. That's completely true. But did I deny that anyway?
More information about the Ironpython-users