Python.NET, MONO and Visual Studio etc.

Robin Becker robin at jessikat.fsnet.co.uk
Wed Oct 31 14:07:07 CET 2001


In article <mailman.1004526634.25044.python-list at python.org>, Oleg
Broytmann <phd at phd.pp.ru> writes
>On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 12:03:16PM +0100, Xavier Defrang wrote:
>> This is almost off-topic but since you guys are talking about that .NET
>> thing, I'd like just to ask anyone in here : WHAT THE HELL IS .NET???
>> 
>> I don't want any fancy buzzwords or corpspeak crap.  I just want a clear,
>
>   Among all the bullshit M$ invented there is one good thing: reusable
>components. This is really good. Of course, they will be implemented by
>those idiots who implemented Outofluck and IIS bugs. But here they are,
>free software components and .NET alternatives.
>
>Oleg.
I would agree with the spirit of reusable components, but a casual
inspection of my Win2K machine reveals thousands of OLE/COM type things
of which about 1% might be reusable.

The main problem is that of the multiplicity of versions of OLE and the
almost complete lack of documentation of the various objects.

This leads to people cobbling things together using inferred properties
of the objects with little real knowledge of the intentions of the
designers.

I see about 9 different M$ widget sets in my registry. I assume that
people have coded for particular sets and now cannot use the upgrade.

Reusability hasn't worked especially well in win32. In other systems I
believe it has I think the work of N Wirth provides good examples.
However, contrast the popularity/ubiquity of win32 with oberon and the
conclusion seems clear, nobody really cares any more about efficiency,
clarity etc etc. 
-- 
Robin Becker



More information about the Python-list mailing list