Python Portability--Not very portable?

geremy condra debatem1 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 6 04:45:12 CEST 2010


On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:50 PM, W. eWatson <wolftracks at invalid.com> wrote:
> In my on-again-off-again experience with Python for 18 months, portability
> seems an issue.
>
> As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out
> of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I
> use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We
> both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the
> new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the
> intervening period.

Portability doesn't mean you can use different versions of your
dependencies and be A-OK. It should be fairly obvious that if the
behavior of your dependencies changes, your code needs to change to
ensure that it demonstrates the same behavior. Portability also
doesn't mean that any given one-character change is valid, so that may
be your issue as well.

> A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program
> to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if
> I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well
> understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like
> a lot of manual labor to do it.

What, why were you compiling a program? And why not just use distutils?

Geremy Condra



More information about the Python-list mailing list