2 GB files

Elbert Lev elbertlev at hotmail.com
Mon Aug 23 23:20:00 CEST 2004

Bart Nessux <bart_nessux at hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<cgcv5v$sjq$1 at solaris.cc.vt.edu>...

> > I suggest start discussing additions to the library. This will improve
> > the package and make it easier to administer.
> > 
> > In my daily programming activities there are several alternatives to
> > Python, f.e. Java or .NET with their comprehensive libraries of
> > classes (much richer then Python's). And what stops me from using it?
> > The size of the distributive! I understand that adding too much will
> > result in an increase of the size of distribution, but something has
> > to be done.
> Having never used Java or .NET... how do they compare in size to Python? 
> I've found that the standard Python download works for me in 95% of the 
> tasks in Windows (sys admin tasks). 

Java and .NET are also free. 

Java run-time and development are free. 
.NET run-time is free.
Java has a little bit better off-the-box library, then .NET, but is
much harder to use in nonsuppervised fashion (CLASSPATH junk).

Sizes: Java development 130MB, .NET development 110MB + 2GB+ for MSDN
and VS (very good). Runtime: Java 32MB and up with options, .NET 18MB.
These libraries are more universal (but lower level) then Python's.

> But sometimes I need Hammond's win32 
> extensions, but only rarely. I've also used the pexpect module a lot... 
> I wish that would be integrated into the main distro, but overall, I'm 
> very pleased with the balance of bang for the buck...

For windows I consider this a part of standard distribution. Additions
you are using depend on what you are douing most.

> Oh, I forgot, Python is free. Perhaps the developers are willing to 
> provide a refund to dissatisfied users ;)

They do not :(

More information about the Python-list mailing list