long-term release schedule?

Yan Weng yweng at cs.uoregon.edu
Fri Jun 13 03:01:48 CEST 2003


"Ray Smith" <ray at rays-web.com> wrote in message
news:5654fff9.0306121555.4c214e92 at posting.google.com...
> "Yan Weng" <yweng at cs.uoregon.edu> wrote in message news:<bc9is2$fr0
> Your first 2 points indicate speed as an issue.  For a large percentage of
> tasks Python seems fast enough as it is. Like everything it would be nice
if
> it was quicker :) but will this constrain the growth of Python????

Well. The first one is talking about about the "byte code optimize". Speed
is just one issue. "Obfuscator" is another kind of "optimizer". :) Some one
do concern about this. Look at the research work for Java and .Net.

Yes, Python is fast enough for most of the tasks. For interface face, 0.01
ms has no advantagement than 0.7 ms. But for scientific computing, it
sometimes means a big difference. 70 hours vs 1 hour? :) The key is not
"absolutly fast". It is "fast enough for specific tasks". Because scientific
computing seems a strong area of python, I have this speed improvement
suggestion just to make python even stronger in this area. Just think about
reseach and applications for "online" image processing and pattern
recognition. Speed is always an important issue.

> An IDE (like for example BOA, PythonCard etc) can be developed externally
to
> the Python Core Language.
Totally agree. I made bad format for my post. Utility is not part of the
core.

> My guess is enough people would be around to keep bug fixes going and the
> real value of Python is now becoming all the external libraries???
Yes or no. Language has to provide "good ways" to help user extend the
lanuage and build external components.
i.e., if python doesn't provide "module" concept, we may have a hard time to
build all those libraries.
So keeping experienced designers and programmers for the core and some
important libraries is necessary. But this is just my thought.

Thanks.
--
Yan Weng
yweng at cs.uoregon.edu
http://www.cs.uoregon.edu/~yweng/

>
> I wouldn't put "static analysis tools" into thre "Core Python language"
basket.
> (but would be useful in large projects)
>
>
> > Utilities needed to improve.
> > + IDE: VB before VB.Net is a pretty bad language but it still gets a lot
of
> > users. Why? It has
> >             a convient IDE making implementing some typical tasks
easily.
>
> An IDE (like for example BOA, PythonCard etc) can be developed externally
to
> the Python Core Language.
>
> > Python need to be *very* successful in "some areas" to gain the
attention of
> > the IT industry.
> >     |- Testing, Scientific computing and Web applications seem the
potential
> >  areas.
> >     |- The enough support from big companies will garantee the time of
the
> > best python programmers.
> >         Recently, I checked out the websites of some good python
> > programmers. I found their economic status are not good. If a person
can't
> > feed up their family. How can you ask them to contribute more time on
the
> > free things?
> >
> > Just some thoughts.
>
> I guess the "angle" of my question was it Guido and his team didn't get
> commercial backing to continue development of Python how would it effect
the
> growth and commercial support of Python??
> My guess is enough people would be around to keep bug fixes going and the
> real value of Python is now becoming all the external libraries???
>
> Regards,
>
> Ray Smith






More information about the Python-list mailing list