IronPython 1.0 is Born

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Wednesday September 6, 2006 @10:34AM from the metal-snakes dept.

dougblank writes "IronPython version 1.0 was just released after 3 years of development. Jim Hugunin, the creator of Jython and the lead developer of the Shared Source IronPython, made the birth announcement earlier this week. From the announcement: 'I wanted to understand how Microsoft could have screwed up so badly that the CLR was a worse platform for dynamic languages than the JVM... I found that Python could run extremely well on the CLR — in many cases noticeably faster than the C-based implementation. [...] Shipping IronPython 1.0 isn't the end of the road, but rather the beginning. Not only will we continue to drive IronPython forward but we're also looking at the bigger picture to make all dynamic languages deeply integrated with the .NET platform and with technologies and products built on top of it. I'm excited about how far we've come, but even more excited by what the future holds!'"

9 of 285 comments (clear)

Yes, but.... by gnud · 2006-09-06 10:37 · Score: 5, Interesting

...does it run on Mono?
1. Re:Yes, but.... by jupo · 2006-09-06 11:32 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Sure does
  
  IronPython on Mono howto
  
  --
  Me I'm a maker, mostly of axioms.
2. Re:Yes, but.... by JimDaGeek · 2006-09-06 12:32 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I actually find the multi-language of of the CLR to be a negative. I work at a fortune 500 and most of us use C# and/or Java. There are a few groups of "programmers" that have always been VB-only/ASP-Only "programmers". They have really no understanding of programming maintainable code. The majority of the junk they churn out is MS-Only/IE-Only crud. The bad part is if one of us programmers ever have to maintain the crappy VB.Net code. C# is a pretty nice language that flows well with .Net and is not overly verbose. VB.Net is the exact opposite, one might as well code in COBOL.Net. It really stinks to have the majority of a code-base in C# and then have some VB.Net assemblies thrown at you that you that you later have to maintain. IMO, it really kills productivity to have to switch to VB.Net from C# for a few bits of a project. To me it seems as if no real design went into VB.Net in contrast to C# which seems like a lot of thought went into how to do things and how not to do things.
  
  I really wish MS just let VB die with VB 6, it would have been for the best. The VB 6 fans could have continued with VB 6 until they learned a real programming language and real programming techniques.
  
  I don't see IronPython being adopted by the non-programmers though.
  I agree. I think Python is a good language and most importantly it is cross-platform. Why would someone want to kill Python by making it MS-Only? As far as getting this IronPython on Mono, I don't see it happening. I use Mono and it is pretty nice. Mono has .Net 1.1 complete and .Net 2.0 is pretty much there now too. I just don't see IronPython ever getting enough development behind it to get a port to Mono, especially with a "shared" source license.
  
  Even though the MS-PR-machine says .Net is cross-platform, it really is not. MS only released a C# compiler for FreeBSD. The compiler is not a big deal. The thing that makes .Net, just like Java, is the extensive framework. MS made an MS-Only framework. It is only because of the hard work of the Mono team that we can enjoy C#/.Net/ASP.Net/ADO.Net/etc on Linux, Mac OS X, Solaris, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD and even MS Windows. Mono is cross-platform, Microsoft .Net is not. When Sun did Java, they put the effort in to make the most important part, the framework, cross-platform. I wish MS did the same.
  
  --
  General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.
About speed. by Poromenos1 · 2006-09-06 10:41 · Score: 5, Informative

I found that Python could run extremely well on the CLR in many cases noticeably faster than the C-based implementation.

Actually, that's not really something to be proud about (though I'm not downplaying the huge achievement of running python on the CLR). The C implementation of Python is not very optimised, and that's why projects like PyPy or psyco are trying to speed Python up (and succeeding very well). I've had CPU-intensive scripts (such as SortSize) run tens of times faster with psyco, by just adding a line of code to my script.

--
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
Link is unreadable! Jeez! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-09-06 10:42 · Score: 5, Informative

[IronPython] [ANN] IronPython 1.0 released today!
Jim Hugunin Jim.Hugunin at microsoft.com
Tue Sep 5 13:27:12 PDT 2006

* Previous message: [IronPython] ipy support in msxsl:script blocks
* Next message: [IronPython] [ANN] IronPython 1.0 released today!
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

I'm extremely happy to announce that we have released IronPython 1.0 today!
http://www.codeplex.com/IronPython

I started work on IronPython almost 3 years ago. My initial motivation for the project was to understand all of the reports that I read on the web claiming that the Common Language Runtime (CLR) was a terrible platform for Python and other dynamic languages. I was surprised to read these reports because I knew that the JVM was an acceptable platform for these languages. About 9 years ago I'd built an implementation of Python that ran on the JVM originally called JPython and later shortened to Jython. This implementation ran a little slower than the native C-based implementation of Python (CPython), but it was easily fast enough and stable enough for production use - testified to by the large number of Java projects that incorporate Jython today.

I wanted to understand how Microsoft could have screwed up so badly that the CLR was a worse platform for dynamic languages than the JVM. My plan was to take a couple of weeks to build a prototype implementation of Python on the CLR and then to use that work to write a short pithy article called, "Why the CLR is a terrible platform for dynamic languages". My plans quickly changed as I worked on the prototype, because I found that Python could run extremely well on the CLR - in many cases noticeably faster than the C-based implementation. For the standard pystone benchmark, IronPython on the CLR was about 1.7x faster than the C-based implementation.

The more time I spent working on IronPython and with the CLR, the more excited I became about its potential to finally deliver on the vision of a single common platform for a broad range of languages. At that same time, I was invited to come out to Microsoft to present IronPython and to talk with members of the CLR team about technical issues that I was running into. I had a great time that day working through these issues with a group of really smart people who all had a deep understanding of virtual machines and language implementation. After much reflection, I decided to join the CLR team at Microsoft where I could work with the platform to make it an even better target for dynamic languages and be able to have interesting technical discussions like that every day.

The first few months at Microsoft were a challenge as I learned what was involved in working at a large company. However, once the initial hurdle was over I started experiencing the things that motivated me to come here in the first place. The team working on dynamic languages in general and IronPython in particular began to grow and I got to have those great technical discussions again about both how to make IronPython as good as it could be and how to make the CLR an even better platform. We began to take advantage of the great new features for dynamic languages already shipping in .NET 2.0 such as DynamicMethods, blindingly fast delegates and a new generics system that was seamlessly integrated with the existing reflection infrastructure.

We were also able to release IronPython publicly from Microsoft with a BSD-style license. In the agile spirit of the project, we put out a new release of IronPython once every three weeks (on average) over the course of the project. This helped us connect well with our daring early adopters and receive and incorporate their feedback to make IronPython better. We've had countless excellent discussions on the mailing list on everything from supporting value types to calling over
OB Black Sabbath by Anonymous Coward · 2006-09-06 10:45 · Score: 5, Funny

I AM IRON PYTHON<\DistortedVoice>

Duh, duh, duh duh duh.
Re:Faster than C? by cduffy · 2006-09-06 11:02 · Score: 5, Informative

Faster than CPython (ya know, the original upstream Python implementation), not faster than C.
Re:Snakes... by neuro.slug · 2006-09-06 13:09 · Score: 5, Funny

Or even better.. shit, they have Ruby on Rails--we need Python on Planes (or Python on MUTHAFUCKIN' Planes)
I call myself out by Ana10g · 2006-09-06 15:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm out.
My apologies for making a trollish post. I was in a pissy mood earlier, firing from the hip, and should have thought my words more carefully. I completely agree with you, actually, regarding your point to the following:

very few people in this world are cut out to be programmers. For some people it's almost natural thing. For others it is a latent talent that can be trained. But most people, regardless of their intelligence, dilligence and personal virtue, could only be trained to the level of mediocrity, at least with the ways we know how to teach.
A lot of people I went to school with couldn't get it. It may have been that the people who didn't get it were the ones that I met in the Information Systems classes (which, where I went to school, was a concentration on a Business Major, where they taught VB as the intro language) were those that were not cut out to be programmers in the first place, thus affecting my perception of languages causing dain bramage.

Anyway, I still don't like VB, but, at least you made me consider my words and thought processes. Apologies to the community at large for being a dick.

--
just an analog boy living in a digital age.