IronPython-0.6 is now available!
"Martin v. Löwis"
martin at v.loewis.de
Thu Jul 29 22:53:56 CEST 2004
Derek Thomson wrote:
> I haven't yet found the time to look at any of this stuff in detail,
> but I will, and it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that it was
> really quite good in many respects - MS didn't just forge it all from
> the ground up in total isolation, ignoring all that had gone before,
> hoping to get it working right in the 3rd release.
I have worked a lot with C# and .NET lately, and found two things:
- the VM is very well designed. It does not really work for languages
other than C#, though (and, yes: I believe that it does not work
well for Python either, despite IronPython's existance (*))
- C# is ok. There are a few unfortunate (IMO) hacks, like the notion
of delegates (which are the only callable objects), and the surprising
behaviour wrt. to interfaces and overriding (where functions in a
subclass won't implement an interface operation defined in the base
class unless that implementation is virtual), but all in all, I
can live with it.
- The IDE is great; MSVC's type-ahead interface (or whatever it is
called really saves a lot of typing an documentation lookup)
- The standard library is both huge and awfully, terrible, and a huge
There is API for nearly any aspect of the system, but many aspects
are ill-designed, apparently in an ad-hoc manner - the entire library
appears to be written under great time pressure. The API is often
counter-intuitive and does not provide features that people would
expect, as very similar features are provided. For example, it has
an interface API for relational databases, but it is not possible
to write an application that is agnostic of the specific interface
implementation, as the application always needs to create instances
of specific implementation classes - they forgot to provide central
More information about the Python-list