[Python.NET] Who is using Python for .NET?
mail at martin-kretschmar.de
Fri Dec 19 04:50:28 EST 2003
> Yes, but at the cost of thinking about everything as C++. I'm moving to
> Python for the simplicity. Hence, bridging through Managed C++ sounds a
> lot better to me. I don't believe I need a 2-way bridge for what I'm
> trying to do, hope I'm not mistaken.
> A friend of mine also pointed out that I could wrap a few parts of my
> C++ classes in C, then use the Python/C API. Depends on what I need to
> expose. It might work in my case, I need some low-level bitmap routines
> exposed. I don't need Python to do any of the heavy lifting, just to
> trigger stuff.
Did you ever have a look at SWIG (http://www.swig.org)?:
SWIG is a software development tool that connects programs written
in C and C++ with a variety of high-level programming languages.
SWIG is primarily used with common scripting languages such as Perl,
Python, Tcl/Tk, and Ruby, however the list of supported languages also
includes non-scripting languages such as Java, OCAML and C#.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery at indiegamedesign.com>
To: <pythondotnet at python.org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [Python.NET] Who is using Python for .NET?
> From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. [mailto:vawjr at rudbek.com]
> > It's my personal
> > belief that Microsoft _still_ intends to bury C++ because they don't
> > control it.
> Why can't they want to bury it because it's a fundamentally unproductive
> enterprise language? Certainly, that's how I feel about it. Why do you
> think I'm jumping ship to Python? Anyways, I think Microsoft might have
> been interested in any higher level garbage collected language, "in
> principle." But Java was Sun's bid to dethrone Microsoft, so of course
> they couldn't swallow *that* ! So what they decided upon was the
> (correct) idea of a higher level garbage collected language, but
> something they own. Witness C# and .NET. And, because these things
> were created later than Java, some improvements were made over Java.
> The main one being, not tying your hands "in the Java way" about what
> your environment is. Interop is basically a better idea than Java's
> "one platform everywhere" idea.
> Of course, when one takes a deep look at .NET, it's all plenty interop
> as long as your problems look like C#! I hope that changes some as .NET
> evolves. A real proof of pudding will be if we ever get fully viable
> Python .NET speaking some future version of IL. Then we'll know the
> Microsoft R&D guys were serious and prevailed in the internal power
> > One distinct advantage boost has
> > over the current PythonNet implementation is that you can go
> > "either way" with boost.
> Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
> Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
> 20% of the world is real.
> 80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.
> Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org
More information about the PythonDotNet