The 3D picture of Python
rjones at ekit-inc.com
Sat Feb 8 06:57:58 CET 2003
On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 3:49 pm, Andrew Dalke wrote:
> Richard Jones, commenting on Richard Jones' post:
> > > Estimated time in the real world to become fully productive in
> > > Python / C++ 3D environment: 1 month.
> > Either you're not as good a programmer as you're making out, or you're
> > not giving yourself enough credit. I'd expect you'd be able to learn the
> > requisite Python, Numeric and PyOpenGL (assuming existing familiarity
> > with OpenGL) knowledge within a week, perhaps two at the most.
> Erm, to go from scratch knowledge to Python + PyOpenGL + Boost +
> MSCV++ + Numeric is quite a bit.
> I know when I started with Python I spent the first couple of days
> just reading the documentation and trying things out. I assume the same
> would be true for each of those modules, so ... that's about 8 days there.
> I then wrote some practice pieces over a span of time to build up a
> feel of how to use Python. Call that a week or so.
> Then figure on building a larger project in the problem domain, along
> with a rewrite or two for different approaches, and a complete rewrite
> once things start to sink in. And a few more practice pieces. And playing
> around with a few other libraries to see how well they work.
> Yes, I could see that it would a month to get up to speed, even for
> a good programmer.
OK, you might be right.
For the record, I recall learning all the python basics in an afternoon.
PyOpenGL and Numeric similarly took about an hour each (having used Python
for a while, and already knowing OpenGL). My first ever Python project was
wrapping the gd library, by hand (in the days before SWIG). That only took me
a couple of days from start to finish. As you say though, there's other
More information about the Python-list