Novel Thoughts on Scripting and Languages

Dave Brueck dave at pythonapocrypha.com
Wed Jan 8 17:11:36 CET 2003


On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, James Huang wrote:

> > Could you please explain how scripting, e.g. ActiveX (per the article on
> > your site) is any better (heck, any _different_ for that matter) than
> > doing it in, e.g. Python? I looked at the example code and it is nearly
> > identical to the Python equivalent (well, I only looked at the Internet
> > Explorer example - once I saw that it was virtually identical to the
> > Python version I stopped reading).
> >
>
> Python for ActiveX is a right thing, and this creates another
> variant of Python. Another famous one is Jython.

Not at all. It's not "Python for ActiveX" - it's the standard version of
Python being used to script ActiveX; it's definitely not some variant of
Python or special build of it or something.

Not that big of a deal, except that ISTM that references to Python on your
site seem to be inaccurate, that's all. In this specific case, the message
I got from your documentation was that Judoscript was particularly
well-suited for these tasks (like scripting ActiveX) but I'm having
trouble seeing how, or for that matter, seeing that it is even different
at all except for some minor syntactical differences. There's nothing
wrong with taking the position that some new tool adds value, I guess I'm
just not "getting it" though.

> > I got a kick out of this statement on your site:
> >
> > "which is a much better effort than Python libraries because Java is an
> > established system programming language , designed for and capable of
> > building big software applications"
> >
> > I guess I don't know who your intended audience is, because to me such a
> > statement really lowers your credibility. If you'd like I'd be happy to
> > help rewrite it to at least make it accurate.
> >
>
> I've heard big software projects done in Python, guess that's what you
> are referring to. Being a C/C++/Java guy, it is hard for me to imagine
> creating big software with weakly-typed languages beyond prototyping.

Hmm... how seriously would you take any assertion I made on the basis of
what I'm comfortable imagining? <0.5 wink> Also, Python isn't a
weakly-typed language.

FWIW, it's hard for me to imagine creating big software with Java or C++,
but somehow people manage to do it anyway. Having worked on moderately
large projects in Java, C++, and Python, I've found Python to be well
suited to the task. Java projects in particular tend to become unstoppable
train wrecks as the project size grows.

> Even so, Java is still unbeatable.

I feel the same way about the color 'forest green'. Surely on that basis
alone people will come around to my way of thinking, right?

Nice talking to you!
-Dave





More information about the Python-list mailing list