Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Nov 2005 16:31 UTC, submitted by Jeremy Jones
.NET (dotGNU too) "How can Microsoft kill Python? When I say 'kill', I mean 'seriously damage the relevance of Python'. I don't mean that Microsoft, as some have suggested, will work on IronPython for a while, get people using it, then hijack the language by seriously changing the syntax of it and thereby breaking compatibility with CPython. So, how does this damage the relevance of Python? If Microsoft, who is investing considerable time and money to create a .Net implementation of Python, only refers to IronPython as a 'dynamic language' and only pushes it as a 'scripting language', many people will begin to assume that that's all that it is good for."
Order by: Score:
Ronald Vos
Member since:
2005-07-06

No further comment.

Reply Score: 1

Visual Basic
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 17:20 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Python + gtk + glade is quickly becoming the "Visual Basic" replacement in the unix world (and to some extend the windows world too). The speed of development is just astounding. Microsoft has a vested interest in various products that dont even aproach the power of this combination, and they need a way to complete. Microsoft doesnt compete, it tries to kill of (or buy when it can) the competition through a variety of dirty tactics.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Visual Basic
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:48 UTC in reply to "Visual Basic"
Anonymous Member since:
---

i know you're going to hate this, but python+pyqt+qt designer is a much nicer solution.

glade is just awful, and gtk+ looks awful on non-unix platforms, wxpython is better for windows/gtk work (although the ide's for wxwidgets suck).

Reply Score: 2

v RE[2]: Visual Basic
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Visual Basic"
RE[2]: Visual Basic
by Emerson on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Visual Basic"
Emerson Member since:
2005-09-19

This might be getting somewhat off topic. But the other, rather rude, reply to this post convinced me to cave in and offer my opinion as well.

I have to agree about both glade and gtk. Glade I'll say is a matter of personal preference. But my preference is not wherever glade is. I found it to be a fairly clumsy tool for the most part. gtk is great for unix projects. But the windows support is only so-so, and seems downright bad on osx. For the most part I'm rather fond of wxpython, but I totally agree about the wxwidget IDEs. Boa seems to be almost there for wxpython, but it's limping along a little too much with gtk2 on unix for me to really consider using it. That combo though, probably comes the closest for me to a VB level of integration. I'm not terribly familiar with the qt bindings for python, but so far they seem to me to be the winner when it comes to making the program seem as native as possible and staying as portable as possible.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Visual Basic
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Visual Basic"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Gtk is badly supported on Windows, yes. Gtk looks fine on it though; really most users don't give a rip if their button widgets are misshaded, etc. Many of them use programs that let them do just that, make every program look different (I've never understood it, but whatever).

Glade is fine. I hate it when people complain about Glade. It could be a lot better, but oh it could be so much worse. Try just writing that initial GUI entirely by hand, not fun.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Visual Basic
by opopov on Thu 1st Dec 2005 05:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Visual Basic"
opopov Member since:
2005-11-28

gtk on win32 is nice-looking and skinable gui(!!!!).
pyGtk+glade is efficacious cure for a undigestible
win32 gui.
Just try...

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Visual Basic
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Dec 2005 06:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Visual Basic"
Anonymous Member since:
---

This combination is like a stupid toy if you compare with Delphi 1.0 from 1995. And now is 2005...

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Visual Basic
by sanctus on Thu 1st Dec 2005 15:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Visual Basic"
sanctus Member since:
2005-08-31

Skinable is no plus.
Adaptable to host theme is.

Pygtk/wxpython combine with glade or xrced with xml file are good tools, no dough, but quite unproductive compare to today's tools.

An interface like sharpdevelop, visual studio, xcode even like it was said before Delphi in 1995 gives an easier and a more productive IDE while there's no disadvantage.

We must compare and seek amelioration base on the best if we want better tools, not from the worst.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Visual Basic
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Dec 2005 17:41 UTC in reply to "Visual Basic"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Well said.

Reply Score: 0

Why use IronPython
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 17:31 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Seriously, who is going to use IronPython? What does it get you? The people interested in using Python are rarely going to be those interested in .Net so why combine them?

Reply Score: 0

RE: Why use IronPython
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:26 UTC in reply to "Why use IronPython"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

It gets you the most powerful and intuitive language and the ability to easily integrate it with a faster language that's not c/c++.

That's all I can think of. I'm not sure how much easier glueing in .net is as compared to using python's c stuff; but that's the only thing I can think of...

Well, there is one added benefit: If your code runs on both, you don't have to ask Windows users to download python. That seems small, but if you don't have to change your code it's a nice benefit!

Reply Score: 0

RE: Why use IronPython
by Celerate on Wed 30th Nov 2005 22:57 UTC in reply to "Why use IronPython"
Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

I think some people envision programming languages as going from being compiled into standalone applications, to being compiled into bitecode files that need to be interpreted. Tends seem to indicate that many of those same people also want one interpreter for almost every language there is.

Mind you that was entirely speculation, a momentary thought of mine which I wouldn't have even mentioned if it weren't for your question.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why use IronPython
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Dec 2005 13:33 UTC in reply to "Why use IronPython"
Anonymous Member since:
---

The same reason some techs at MS decided to install windows in a port-a-potty?

Reply Score: 0

re: Visual Basic
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 17:34 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

You should try Gambas if you're looking for a Visual Basic replacement. It's got GTK bindings, but it's primarily a QT app. Your code won't care which visual toolkit (or no toolkit) you use, however.

Reply Score: 0

v Yawn
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 17:35 UTC
Gzzy
Member since:
2005-11-21

Seriously, way too many of the articles he links to are speculatorary and inflamatory turds with little to no substance. There needs to be a filter between this guy and the front page of osnews.com.

Because of these articles this place is quickly turning into a cross between slashdot and macdailynews.

Edited 2005-11-30 18:00

Reply Score: 5

Howto Kill Free Software
by Mystilleef on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:02 UTC
Mystilleef
Member since:
2005-06-29

Last time I checked, Python was a free software project. Therefore, you "kill" Python by "killing" contributors to the project. I know Microsoft is considered evil and all, but I really doubt they'll go that far.

Edited 2005-11-30 18:06

Reply Score: 2

RE: Howto Kill Free Software
by Tyr. on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:14 UTC in reply to "Howto Kill Free Software"
Tyr. Member since:
2005-07-06

Last time I checked, Python was a free software project. Therefore, you "kill" Python by "killing" contributors to the project. I know Microsoft is considered evil and all, but I really doubt they'll go that far.

You never really know :
Balmer : "I'm going to f---ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again," ( http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/microsoft-ceo-im-going-to-fin... )

Then again they always say it's the quiet ones that snap. :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Howto Kill Free Software
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Howto Kill Free Software"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Are you implying that the movie AntiTrust will come true?
Someone warn Guido!

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Howto Kill Free Software
by Celerate on Wed 30th Nov 2005 23:01 UTC in reply to "RE: Howto Kill Free Software"
Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

Did you ever see that old TV spoof "Dinosaurs", with the boss of that company Earl worked for being a big triceratops with a bad temper. My memory is fuzzy, but I remember when he got mad he would threaten to literally bite the employee's head(s) off.

The picture of Ballmer on that site reminded me of one of those scenes, the resemblence is actually quite amazing.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Howto Kill Free Software
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:31 UTC in reply to "Howto Kill Free Software"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Silly Mystilleef, dying is for people...
To kill a language you have to get people to stop using it. Building a language almost no one uses is pointless. Even more pointless than building other software no one uses, because you're programming to help people program quicker (why not just program what you wanted right?).
I think the author's concern is that Python may not become as popular as he thinks it should become. That's what's meant by killing it there.

This is the first I've actively looked at IronPython. Until today I didn't know it was run by Microsoft...
Thanks to OSN for putting this on my radar, heh.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Howto Kill Free Software
by Mystilleef on Wed 30th Nov 2005 19:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Howto Kill Free Software"
Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

My point is a free software project dies when there are no contributors to it, regardless of Microsoft's assassination techniques.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Howto Kill Free Software
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 19:48 UTC in reply to "Howto Kill Free Software"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Last time I checked, Python was a free software project. Therefore, you "kill" Python by "killing" contributors to the project. I know Microsoft is considered evil and all, but I really doubt they'll go that far.

Dude, haven't you seen the movie AntiTrust? They just might go that far. :p

Reply Score: 0

Nah
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:10 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I think they are to busy trying to kill java.

Reply Score: 1

Uhhg...
by deathshadow on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:15 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

If anything would kill python, I suspect it would be python itself... The only damn language I've ever dealt with that makes Fortran or Forth make sense.

It's like everything that makes C dialects cryptic compared to Wirth languages multiplied tenfold - Hell, you KNOW something is noodle-doodle when logic flow is controlled by tabs instead of operators.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Uhhg...
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:30 UTC in reply to "Uhhg..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

couldn't agree more...

is simply insane any language to rely on indentation for anything but "beautyfication".

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Uhhg...
by bobi on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Uhhg..."
bobi Member since:
2005-11-14

that's if you code alone.
it uniformise and force the coding style. that RULES.
Ever tried to maintain a C project of 10 000 lines written in author's own style ?

Python forces it. Open your mind, you troll.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Uhhg...
by emarkp on Wed 30th Nov 2005 20:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Uhhg..."
emarkp Member since:
2005-09-10

Python forces it. Open your mind, you troll.

You don't see the inherent contradiction in these two sentences?

I've never had a problem with different coding styles in large projects in C++. Basic guidelines have been just fine.

Implied syntax is a problem, and it's the primary reason I can't do any serious programming in Python. It's a neat language, but the "whitespace==syntax" is a dealbreaker.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Uhhg...
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 20:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Uhhg..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

Never heard of COBOL?

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Uhhg...
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Uhhg..."
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Actually, Python still allows you to play style games. For example:
if (a = b):
c = a + b
if a = b: c = a + b

I think the indented blocks have to do with it's syntax finding origins in the language ABC which was for high-intelligence (scienfitic, engineering, etc) non-programmers.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Uhhg...
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:36 UTC in reply to "Uhhg..."
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

I used to say that. Then I got a clue, picked up a book, did some reading, did some coding, and discovered Python to be a wholly logical and elegant language.
I still get a little frustrated with the lack of obvious block end notation, but I live with it for the extras...

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Uhhg...
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Uhhg..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

yes the indentation thing was a big barrier to entry for me at first, but once you've started using python, you realise what you've been missing.

i used to love perl/php/c (and hate java!) but now i use python by choice.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Uhhg...
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Uhhg..."
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Always loathed perl. Used to love php, still don't have a problem with it, but I've come to find the $var thing annoying.
Maybe it makes the JIT part a bit quicker, and that is probably worth it.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Uhhg...
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:57 UTC in reply to "Uhhg..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

<Yoda>
The language of the gods Forth is.
Badly of it speak not.
</Yoda>

Reply Score: 1

RE: Uhhg...
by setuid_w00t on Wed 30th Nov 2005 20:55 UTC in reply to "Uhhg..."
setuid_w00t Member since:
2005-10-22

Python indentation only bothers people who don't follow sane indentation practices. If you indent properly to begin with, you realize that curly braces are really just a waste of time.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Uhhg...
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Dec 2005 03:04 UTC in reply to "Uhhg..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

I agree. IMHO the Python language is horrible.

Reply Score: 1

boo
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:20 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Before you throw out python, go and check out boo:

Boo is a new object oriented statically typed programming language for the Common Language Infrastructure with a python inspired syntax and a special focus on language and compiler extensibility.

http://boo.codehaus.org/

Reply Score: 0

I love this article
by MightyPenguin on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:26 UTC
MightyPenguin
Member since:
2005-11-18

"...refers to IronPython as a 'dynamic language' and only pushes it as a 'scripting language', many people will begin to assume that that's all that it is good for."

Maybe that's because that's what the language is good for? Last I checked it was a 'dynamic' and 'scripting' language. What needs to change here is not a redefinition of what IronPython is, but a wider acceptance of 'scripting' languages as more broadly useful then people widely believe.

Reply Score: 3

...
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:36 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Well, Microsoft would push Python for what it IS good for.
Or is there even a small app written in python (or any dynamic language) where you don't feel that it is written with something that isn't meant for creating real apps?

Reply Score: 1

RE: ...
by ma_d on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:42 UTC in reply to "..."
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Define small. I don't know that I'd recommend writing a million line program in Python (I'd be curious to see how this would run though); but generally speaking you should be fine... Like anything, you may need to do some parts in a faster language; which is why Python provides c bindings.

http://python.org/doc/faq/general.html#have-any-significant-project...

Reply Score: 0

erm python *IS* a scripting language....
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 18:45 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

...so are perl, php and asp, i don't think they've suffered from nobody using them!

and ironpython will mean that you can use that scripting language to make clr programs the same as you would use c#, so edging it away from just scripting.

i don't think ms will kill python, jees they've been trying to kill java for years and that just seems to get more popular (god knows why!)

Reply Score: 0

Cant kill Python
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 19:14 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Anyone who thinks PYTHON is a replacement for VB is kidding themselves.

As long as people want to use PYTHON they still will.
Also why should anyone object to PYTHON being described as a dynamic scripting language?
I would take that as a complement not a knock back.
These days you can write big complex applications using dynamic script languages because the computers are fast enough to do that.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: ...
by Morty on Wed 30th Nov 2005 19:41 UTC
Morty
Member since:
2005-07-06

Define small. I don't know that I'd recommend writing a million line program in Python (I'd be curious to see how this would run though); but generally speaking you should be fine...

All true, but perhaps a million line program in Python would be hard to do. Since Python are a rather verbose language when it comes to the number of lines you have to write. A million line program would have a hell of a lot functionality :-)

Take a more modest example like the Eric3 the ide, the 3.8 version is 68,698 physical lines of code according to sloccount. Lot of the heavy lifting is of course done in C++, via the PyQt/PyKDE bindings. But that's one of the reasons you use toolkits in the first place, rather than implement everything yourself. Anyway Eric3 is fairly big, but the use of Python does not create any hindrances or decreased performance. Besides I don't think you can find anything with comparable functionality anywhere close to that low SLOC. As a comparison, granted it has more functionality, KDevelop in 3.5 has a SLOC of 369,604.

Reply Score: 1

kill kill kill
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 19:41 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

post something about something killing something, and you'll get your something post posted. people like to see sony and apple and microsoft and google getting killed. Killing sells, kill more!!!! apple is on the way out, google is on the way out, microsoft is on the way out, unless you are a trendy geek, then microsoft isn't that bad.

Maybe we could just replace OS-news with a webpage the randomly generates

<major-name> being killed by <major-name> : fluf article follows.

Reply Score: 1

Maybe you should try Ruby
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 20:49 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Ruby is a pretty nice alternative to Python. IMHO I think it is way more elegant than Python and does pretty much the same thing but I find myself coding a lot faster and don't really think about myself programming anymore. Anyone else use Ruby?

Reply Score: 0

RE: Maybe you should try Ruby
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:04 UTC in reply to "Maybe you should try Ruby"
Anonymous Member since:
---

The guy is not realy talking about Python, he is talking about IronPyton so Ruby is not realy an alternative. The author is a bit .NET fixated and there is nothing out there threatening to kill the real Python, CPython; not .NET and not Ruby on Rails (don't take this as a hit against Ruby, I use it too and like it).

Python is a nice language and it hase its killer app, Pygame. Find another dynamicly typed language that has sprowted that many games!

Reply Score: 0

Python and the .NET
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:09 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

For me, Python is the most beautiful and useful languages around. I do nearly everything with it.

I was a C#/ASP.NET programmer for the first three years of its existance and I've simply had enough. I hope to never touch that crapform again.

If Microsoft does munge together their own version of Python, it will only matter to the VBers out there. Real programmers will mostly be oblivious to it, I think.

Reply Score: 0

Kill Python?
by Anonymous on Wed 30th Nov 2005 21:27 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

We do pretty much all our coding at work with Python on Windows systems. I've been using Python for about five years now, and it's an excellent language. Very clean, very powerful, elegant and maintainable. I must admit, we've been eyeing up IronPython as it's possible we might have to eventually dip our toes in .NET over the next year or two.

I can't see MS killing off Python. That really isn't going to happen - if anything, IronPython will probably convert more people to the power of Python.

As for Ruby - I really can't see what the fuss is about, other than Ruby on Rails.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Kill Python?
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Dec 2005 16:25 UTC in reply to "Kill Python?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

While I realize that this article is more about IronPython and Windows, I would like to also throw my humble opinion for Ruby as well. While Ruby on Rails is the cat's meow or the hot flavor of the past month, the actual ruby language is quite elegant even more so then python IMHO. Maybe my mind works with the language more then it does with Python. I, howver, am afraid it will die out due to the popularity of python. Just because more people like a certain language more does not necessarily mean it is the better language. IE Windows vs Unix back in the day.

i am glad that python in general seems to be getting good press and applications are obviously being generated ie games but I hope that ruby will become as or more popular as I think the logic behind it may be it bit more sound than python. Again this is just my opinion.

Thank You

Reply Score: 0

Kill Python?!!
by trip_out on Wed 30th Nov 2005 22:04 UTC
trip_out
Member since:
2005-07-09

I pretty much do all my scientific simulations using python (scipy, gnuplot-py etc..). Python is increadably flexible with many many uses. What a ridiculus article.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Kill Python?!!
by sanctus on Thu 1st Dec 2005 16:46 UTC in reply to "Kill Python?!!"
sanctus Member since:
2005-08-31

This is not really the point. Python is a powerful scripting and programming language. The only complaining about his programming capabilities are snobbish who cannot accept that productivity might matter more than a couple of cpu cycle.

The problem here is if Microsoft use the same strategy they tried with java in 2000, it might throw away python as we know it today. Back then, Sun had use brute lawyers force and money to protect java against visual java. But the python organization as no such power nor that money to defend itself. It aim more ironPython, but it can influence python in every aspect.(python being associated with ironpython.)

The strategy is simple.

1.Make people use the product. By being a good supporter and with nice advertising, people will start using it. MS controlling 90% of the market, it will soon be the dominant plateform python code and name will be found. Plus they will make it certain that you see it as a “scripting” language only – they have C# for the rest.

2.Change the standard. Becoming the leading body of the majority of python developers and users, they will add their own standard and personal Windows centric classes and methods. Python.org will have no choice but to become a follower if they don't want to see new apps being incompatible an lose credibility. Even then, python will start to be a Windows “scripting” language in peoples mind.

3.Other OS will lose(far less popular) a powerful language. Then, want standard? back to C. While Microsoft will promote productive application, productive api and IDE for developers, other OS's (especially opensource) will still debug memory allocation for basic desktop apps while MS deliver. A clear strategic advantage for Microsoft. You can see it like the html standard Microsoft imposed us.

This is not a killer strategy, but the sum the these make it a competitive advantage on long run.

Reply Score: 0

Don't Cuddle A Convicted Monopoly
by Anonymous on Thu 1st Dec 2005 16:43 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Don't feed the chair throwing bears

Reply Score: 0

Come on..
by Kris on Thu 1st Dec 2005 17:49 UTC
Kris
Member since:
2005-07-24

Python or Ruby, cou can always benchmark your code, change it and if it's not fast enough rewrite critical parts in "faster" languages. So the whole "shouldn't be used for applications" is realy not open minded. Also I'd risk saying that paying attention in your CS classes on algorithms will yield more code performance boosts than changing languages most of the time.

For large applications, readable code and easily changable code are often more important than pure speed.

And the whole "indentation sucks" argument. Please. Noone complains about useless ; in C code. If you want to use a language get used to the syntax. If everyone would start with Python as their first language we might actally see well formatted code because its syntax teaches good programming practice as a side effect.

Reply Score: 1