"You don't necessarily want the meat of a CPU intensive app to be python; but using python to marshal bits of high performance code seems to be quite common and popular. Numpy and Scipy come to mind. You can embed chunks of C as well."
This does work quite well. Everyone knows that C is faster than Python - so when you hit a point where you need speed, you write that in C and import it into your Python code. It's fairly easy to do, as is the reverse - writing the code in C and using an embedded Python interpreter. Perhaps not what you'd want to use for a micro-controller, but choosing the right tools to use is always important.
Here's an overly simplistic example, for those who are curious:
Well, I really like Python, but I agree with the grandparent that lack of good debugging tools is really annoying. Frankly, I'd like a debugger that'd allow me to easily insert breakpoints and watchpoints into a program. Also, I'd like the debugger to be standardized and included with the default distribution of the language. C, C++, Java, Perl and Ruby all come with debuggers. Why doesn't Python?
It does come with one, although I have to admit that I prefer winpdb, since it not only has an optional GUI for debugging, but it supports debugging/breakpoints remotely - which is really nice for mod_wsgi and mod_python apps.
I can't really offer any help in regards to an IDE - vim does what I need it to, without wasting a bunch of resources.
That is a good question. Have you checked with EFF? They have a lot of IP talent that might be of use for you, and this sort of thing at least sounds right up their alley.
It seems to me that at least in this type of situation, patent law as it stands prevents any number of good (and bad) ideas from being tested, tried, and released... which is to the detriment of society as a whole. We can learn from the bad ideas just as well - sometimes better - as we can from the good. Often an inventor misses something important, but if it's publicized well, others might not make the same mistake. We call this "learning."
If they skydive twice a month on average, it says something.
I went skydiving for the first time for my 50th b-day. The cameraman, who made 5(?) jumps that day, was around my age.
That is really cool. I can only hope I feel like doing that when/if I make the big five-oh.
Age is only a big deal if you let it be a big deal.
I'm a young pup (28) in the grand scheme of things, but I already have to agree. I've run into so many people who find their "niche" and aren't willing to learn or try anything else; it's pretty confusing and can sometimes be quite frustrating. When I see a new language, or even a methodology within an existing language, I try it out - generally at home or during slow times at work on a virtual machine, where it can't muck things up - and see what the big deal is. Obviously, there have been times where I simply had to stop and say, "Well, that's pretty stupid", but other times it's been really darn helpful. D can be handy at times, and Python will always have a special place in my toolbox, right next to Perl, awk, and bash.
This mindset, of course, extends to hobbies, genres of music, books, and pretty much everything else (within reason - I'll skip over the cordless bungee jumping, even if it is a nice looking bridge).
I totally agree. If Java ( or Pyhton etc. for that matter ) were fast enough why did Google choose C++ to build their insanely fast search engine. MapReduce rocks.. No Java solution can even come close.
I rest my case.
Google also uses Python for some of their other projects. GWT? Java. The concept of using the right tool for the job is nearly as important as knowing how to do the job in the first place - some might even say it's *more* important.
When one looks at the choice of tools - C, C++, C#, Perl, Python, PHP, or even bash/awk/sed, etc - one has to keep in mind what the product is going to be used for, and what sort load it will have to handle. Is the programmer time saved by coding it in Python worth the machine time spent running the product? For that matter, if it isn't, is it worth writing the slower code in C and in turn using that as a Python module?
This is applicable to Perl as well. Don't know about PHP, as I haven't written as much in it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it works the same way.
A "simple text editor" dev environment stopped being useful or productive back in the 90s.
Good thing that emacs and vim aren't "simple text editors".:D
At least, not if you know how to use them.
But I'm still a fan of the UNIX philosophy - a program should do one thing, and do it well. A great editor, a great debugger, and a great SCM tool - what the heck can't you do with that?
Provided that you only need the functionality that flatpages provides, that's true.
Don't get me wrong, I love the heck out of flatpages, and in my experience it seems to meet at least 50% of my clients' needs (which is the intent of contrib apps - to take care of common use cases).
But I often run into clients who need more than that bare functionality. Usually I leverage flatpages by inheriting its model into an abstract base class (saves a bit of typing), and extend the heck out of it from there.
Again, it's still way better a head start than writing it from scratch; just don't assume that the contrib apps will (or worse, that they should) solve every need, want, and desire.
I keep seeing this response to "The demo sucked" argument, but does anyone know whether or not Cliff Harris' demos are decent? If they're not, that might shed some light on the topic in question.
I can understand why he's asking this. In fact, I have to give him kudos for asking, instead of being stupid and just raving against the pirates. He's giving those who don't pay for his product the benefit of the doubt, and asking for their reasoning. Maybe if more game developers did this, there wouldn't be a *need* to pirate a game just to demo it.
I realize that I'm likely in the minority, but just the fact that he's being reasonable makes me far more likely to purchase his product - if his demos are worth a crap, of course.
That science-fiction authors nowadays can never seem to write a concise little work and leave it at that is increasingly remarked on as a blight on the genre.
I've ran into a couple of authors, science fiction and otherwise, who should have wrapped it up before they did. I can grant you that. However, there have been many series that I've read that were absolutely fucking awesome, and would have lost a great deal of value had they cut it short. Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen series is one example of such, just off the top of my head. Hell, he's still not done with it, and I'm definitely glad for it. Despite the number of books written in it, I've found it far more enjoyable than even the Wheel of Time - though honestly, I do like that one, too.
Frankly, if you don't like the series, or get tired of it, all you have to do is not buy the next book in that series. Then it can end for you, and you're not supporting a work that you don't enjoy. Those of us who do, in fact, like a long series of books will be just as happy to keep supporting them.
Or perhaps you can write a better story, and keep it down to a trilogy. If it's a good one, then everyone wins.
If, on the other hand, you can find a way to improve it, I'm sure many people will welcome your advice and implement it.
Agreed. Just telling a programmer that their software isn't usable isn't very constructive. Often times, they already know that, they just don't know the best way to fix it.
One good, non-specific way might be to offer to write an article including a basic set of guidelines for a popular site - say linux journal or linux magazine. Or where ever you think it might come up nicely in a google search, for that matter.
I realize that this might not be a motivation for those who want an immediate return for their efforts - who want specific software X to be more usable - but you never know. Maybe someone who's currently writing software Y, that you've been dying for, will take your advice and make their software contribution that much better.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that a lot of programmers - myself included - would love it if usability experts would devote some of their time and effort into making our own time and effort more worthwhile to the end users. Heck, even if they don't consider themselves an "expert", if they think they have a few ideas on what would be better, it'd be much more appreciated than a simple comment about how something "sucks".
What knowledge is there to be had by following instructions off some text phile you d/l'd off some pirate BBS, anyway?
... Uhm. Plenty.
TLDR: Documentation is a Good Thing.
I have to agree. If you didn't already know how to do it, then those instructions taught you how to do it. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that was the point of a tutorial: Teaching you how to do something.
Normally I'm in favor of elitism, but when one goes to the extent of saying, "There's no point in this documentation because anyone worth anything already knows it." they're going a tad too far.
If people want to take drugs, and ruin their lives,it's their choice , not mine.
That is an extremely puritan, and (far worse) uneducated opinion that you're voicing there. I mean, what's next? People who enjoy a glass of wine with dinner, oh noes, they're evil! And, *gasp* they might even have sex later that night!
I know McGruff has done serious damage to the mindsets of the younger generations, but crap, something's got to give.
I'm not defending heroin, cocaine, or crack; but if you look at the effects of marijuana versus alcohol, they pretty much even out. And plenty of people manage to live their lives just fine after a beer or a glass of wine.
Personally, I don't consume marijuana. But that's my own, personal preference. I do, however, like a drink on occasion. As long as they're not in a fricken elevator or other enclosed area, I could give a crap less if someone wants to light up and enjoy themselves as well.
Simply put: idiots ruin lives. Substances aren't the problem. People are.
From a software Freedom perspective, how is that any different than dual booting Windows?
It isn't, really. If someone were to release a FOSS powered console system (or even just the OS layer to put on one that I already have) that had games of comparative quality, I'd use it. I'm pretty sure a lot of other people on here would, as well.
Unfortunately, I haven't seen such an animal. Sure, I can install Linux on a PS3 - but then I'm limited to the same games that I can run on my PC Linux installation, which sort of defeats the purpose.
If there *is* such a project then by all means, please, let me know.
Yeah, with the Ruby on Rails cheat code, and you start with a book full of spells... but your character will also cast them v e r y s l o w l y.
On the other hand, there's a C cheat code as well: your character moves and attacks lightning fast, but you have to write your own spells. And robe. And wizard hat.
On the contrary, it informs everybody of the flaw at the same time. That does indeed include the black hats, but also the vendor and the users. I have to agree, for the same reason I'd rather know if a product I buy might set my house on fire. Or, perhaps a better analogy, if the product might allow someone else to set my house on fire.
Knowing a product has a security flaw might prevent me from purchasing it, yes, but only if there isn't a reliable way to prevent the flaw from being exploited until the vendor can release a patch.
That money isn't going on to the actual programmers, though. It does, however, provide an open platform for programmers to develop for. Something that is way the hell easier (and cheaper) to do than a closed system, where you have to pay out the wazoo to have access to the system's API and/or documentation.
Some of us program for money as well as contribute to FOSS. Making our day jobs easier is most definitely not a Bad Thing.
I was surprised D was in the top 20. I did have to check if this was not a joke. D is pretty spiffy though, especially with the tango package. I'm not surprised that it's gaining in popularity.
You mean the Sony that went with all standard interfaces on the PS3 and supports Linux on it?
Personally, I like BluRay's higher density and I like the fact that Microsoft had nothing to do with it. Yes, it's great that they have *limited* support for Linux on the PS3. Now, if only they'd allow GPU access. I remember reading that someone had unofficially figured out a way around being blocked out of it - anyone have any updates on this? I would be installing Linux on my PS3 right now, if not for this fact.
Try reading what I wrote; I didn't say "prefer writing for Windows" I said "creating off-the-shelf software." The religon behind OSS will keep those developers (and many investors) away. But there isn't really a vast number of "I only write proprietary code" developers. Most major open source projects include some developers who work on closed-source applications during the day and write OSS in their off-time. There are even open source projects that include people who work at companies like Microsoft.
I can think of several developers right now work for a company called UGS who write OSS projects in their spare time.
Agreed. This is a good thing, IMHO. It can lead to companies donating programming time (aka money) to open source projects to assist in writing and/or submitting patches for software that the aforementioned companies make use of. That way, everyone wins. It doesn't have to be all or nothing - in fact, since I have to eat and pay bills, I'm rather for letting people pay for software. That allows me to keep living and contributing to open source projects. See a pattern here?
It might make it easier if people thought less in terms of profit (or lack thereof), and more in terms of our economy at large.
Slashdot Mirror
"You don't necessarily want the meat of a CPU intensive app to be python; but using python to marshal bits of high performance code seems to be quite common and popular. Numpy and Scipy come to mind. You can embed chunks of C as well."
This does work quite well. Everyone knows that C is faster than Python - so when you hit a point where you need speed, you write that in C and import it into your Python code. It's fairly easy to do, as is the reverse - writing the code in C and using an embedded Python interpreter. Perhaps not what you'd want to use for a micro-controller, but choosing the right tools to use is always important.
Here's an overly simplistic example, for those who are curious:
#include <Python.h>
void exec_py(const char* code)
{
Py_Initialize();
PyRun_SimpleString(code);
Py_Finalize();
}
/* tada! */
Well, I really like Python, but I agree with the grandparent that lack of good debugging tools is really annoying. Frankly, I'd like a debugger that'd allow me to easily insert breakpoints and watchpoints into a program. Also, I'd like the debugger to be standardized and included with the default distribution of the language. C, C++, Java, Perl and Ruby all come with debuggers. Why doesn't Python?
It does come with one, although I have to admit that I prefer winpdb, since it not only has an optional GUI for debugging, but it supports debugging/breakpoints remotely - which is really nice for mod_wsgi and mod_python apps.
I can't really offer any help in regards to an IDE - vim does what I need it to, without wasting a bunch of resources.
That is a good question. Have you checked with EFF? They have a lot of IP talent that might be of use for you, and this sort of thing at least sounds right up their alley.
It seems to me that at least in this type of situation, patent law as it stands prevents any number of good (and bad) ideas from being tested, tried, and released... which is to the detriment of society as a whole. We can learn from the bad ideas just as well - sometimes better - as we can from the good. Often an inventor misses something important, but if it's publicized well, others might not make the same mistake. We call this "learning."
"Assertion failed: sorry, your plane will now crash."
Yeah. Makes some sense...
If they skydive twice a month on average, it says something. I went skydiving for the first time for my 50th b-day. The cameraman, who made 5(?) jumps that day, was around my age.
That is really cool. I can only hope I feel like doing that when/if I make the big five-oh.
Age is only a big deal if you let it be a big deal.
I'm a young pup (28) in the grand scheme of things, but I already have to agree. I've run into so many people who find their "niche" and aren't willing to learn or try anything else; it's pretty confusing and can sometimes be quite frustrating. When I see a new language, or even a methodology within an existing language, I try it out - generally at home or during slow times at work on a virtual machine, where it can't muck things up - and see what the big deal is. Obviously, there have been times where I simply had to stop and say, "Well, that's pretty stupid", but other times it's been really darn helpful. D can be handy at times, and Python will always have a special place in my toolbox, right next to Perl, awk, and bash.
This mindset, of course, extends to hobbies, genres of music, books, and pretty much everything else (within reason - I'll skip over the cordless bungee jumping, even if it is a nice looking bridge).
I totally agree. If Java ( or Pyhton etc. for that matter ) were fast enough why did Google choose C++ to build their insanely fast search engine. MapReduce rocks.. No Java solution can even come close. I rest my case.
Google also uses Python for some of their other projects. GWT? Java. The concept of using the right tool for the job is nearly as important as knowing how to do the job in the first place - some might even say it's *more* important.
When one looks at the choice of tools - C, C++, C#, Perl, Python, PHP, or even bash/awk/sed, etc - one has to keep in mind what the product is going to be used for, and what sort load it will have to handle. Is the programmer time saved by coding it in Python worth the machine time spent running the product? For that matter, if it isn't, is it worth writing the slower code in C and in turn using that as a Python module?
This is applicable to Perl as well. Don't know about PHP, as I haven't written as much in it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it works the same way.
A "simple text editor" dev environment stopped being useful or productive back in the 90s.
Good thing that emacs and vim aren't "simple text editors". :D
At least, not if you know how to use them.
But I'm still a fan of the UNIX philosophy - a program should do one thing, and do it well. A great editor, a great debugger, and a great SCM tool - what the heck can't you do with that?
Provided that you only need the functionality that flatpages provides, that's true.
Don't get me wrong, I love the heck out of flatpages, and in my experience it seems to meet at least 50% of my clients' needs (which is the intent of contrib apps - to take care of common use cases).
But I often run into clients who need more than that bare functionality. Usually I leverage flatpages by inheriting its model into an abstract base class (saves a bit of typing), and extend the heck out of it from there.
Again, it's still way better a head start than writing it from scratch; just don't assume that the contrib apps will (or worse, that they should) solve every need, want, and desire.
After all, that's what pinax is for. (;
This means those particular demos were not good.
I keep seeing this response to "The demo sucked" argument, but does anyone know whether or not Cliff Harris' demos are decent? If they're not, that might shed some light on the topic in question.
I can understand why he's asking this. In fact, I have to give him kudos for asking, instead of being stupid and just raving against the pirates. He's giving those who don't pay for his product the benefit of the doubt, and asking for their reasoning. Maybe if more game developers did this, there wouldn't be a *need* to pirate a game just to demo it.
I realize that I'm likely in the minority, but just the fact that he's being reasonable makes me far more likely to purchase his product - if his demos are worth a crap, of course.
That science-fiction authors nowadays can never seem to write a concise little work and leave it at that is increasingly remarked on as a blight on the genre.
I've ran into a couple of authors, science fiction and otherwise, who should have wrapped it up before they did. I can grant you that. However, there have been many series that I've read that were absolutely fucking awesome, and would have lost a great deal of value had they cut it short. Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen series is one example of such, just off the top of my head. Hell, he's still not done with it, and I'm definitely glad for it. Despite the number of books written in it, I've found it far more enjoyable than even the Wheel of Time - though honestly, I do like that one, too.
Frankly, if you don't like the series, or get tired of it, all you have to do is not buy the next book in that series. Then it can end for you, and you're not supporting a work that you don't enjoy. Those of us who do, in fact, like a long series of books will be just as happy to keep supporting them.
Or perhaps you can write a better story, and keep it down to a trilogy. If it's a good one, then everyone wins.
If, on the other hand, you can find a way to improve it, I'm sure many people will welcome your advice and implement it.
Agreed. Just telling a programmer that their software isn't usable isn't very constructive. Often times, they already know that, they just don't know the best way to fix it.
One good, non-specific way might be to offer to write an article including a basic set of guidelines for a popular site - say linux journal or linux magazine. Or where ever you think it might come up nicely in a google search, for that matter.
I realize that this might not be a motivation for those who want an immediate return for their efforts - who want specific software X to be more usable - but you never know. Maybe someone who's currently writing software Y, that you've been dying for, will take your advice and make their software contribution that much better.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that a lot of programmers - myself included - would love it if usability experts would devote some of their time and effort into making our own time and effort more worthwhile to the end users. Heck, even if they don't consider themselves an "expert", if they think they have a few ideas on what would be better, it'd be much more appreciated than a simple comment about how something "sucks".
What knowledge is there to be had by following instructions off some text phile you d/l'd off some pirate BBS, anyway?
... Uhm. Plenty.
TLDR: Documentation is a Good Thing.
I have to agree. If you didn't already know how to do it, then those instructions taught you how to do it. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that was the point of a tutorial: Teaching you how to do something.
The Linux Documentation Project, at least, seems to think so.
Normally I'm in favor of elitism, but when one goes to the extent of saying, "There's no point in this documentation because anyone worth anything already knows it." they're going a tad too far.
If people want to take drugs, and ruin their lives,it's their choice , not mine.
That is an extremely puritan, and (far worse) uneducated opinion that you're voicing there. I mean, what's next? People who enjoy a glass of wine with dinner, oh noes, they're evil! And, *gasp* they might even have sex later that night!
I know McGruff has done serious damage to the mindsets of the younger generations, but crap, something's got to give.
I'm not defending heroin, cocaine, or crack; but if you look at the effects of marijuana versus alcohol, they pretty much even out. And plenty of people manage to live their lives just fine after a beer or a glass of wine.
Personally, I don't consume marijuana. But that's my own, personal preference. I do, however, like a drink on occasion. As long as they're not in a fricken elevator or other enclosed area, I could give a crap less if someone wants to light up and enjoy themselves as well.
Simply put: idiots ruin lives. Substances aren't the problem. People are.
(G'bye, karma.)
If I want to play games, I can get a console.
From a software Freedom perspective, how is that any different than dual booting Windows?
It isn't, really. If someone were to release a FOSS powered console system (or even just the OS layer to put on one that I already have) that had games of comparative quality, I'd use it. I'm pretty sure a lot of other people on here would, as well.
Unfortunately, I haven't seen such an animal. Sure, I can install Linux on a PS3 - but then I'm limited to the same games that I can run on my PC Linux installation, which sort of defeats the purpose.
If there *is* such a project then by all means, please, let me know.
No, the O in gnome stands for goatse !
I will never be able to look at the word GNOME again.
But man, that would make a really cool logo.
If you're really into the idea of a deployment framework like Rails, you might want to check out Python and Django.
I can second this. Django isn't a magic bullet, by any means, but it can certainly help speed up the turn around time on putting up web applications.
The built-in admin (especially the upcoming newforms-admin) is really rather nice, too.
Yeah, with the Ruby on Rails cheat code, and you start with a book full of spells... but your character will also cast them v e r y s l o w l y.
On the other hand, there's a C cheat code as well: your character moves and attacks lightning fast, but you have to write your own spells. And robe. And wizard hat.
If there is an active open source project working on virtual worlds, we'd like to know, too.
You mean like this?
So, Global Warming = Less Polar Bears = More Seals = Less Cod = More Plankton = More Solar Conversion = Global Cooling!!!!
See? The planet is fine. It'll handle this whole global warming thing without a problem.
:D
The people living on it? Well, we're pretty much screwed.
Knowing a product has a security flaw might prevent me from purchasing it, yes, but only if there isn't a reliable way to prevent the flaw from being exploited until the vendor can release a patch.
Some of us program for money as well as contribute to FOSS. Making our day jobs easier is most definitely not a Bad Thing.
Now I feel bad for eating all of those poor things in Nethack.
Personally, I like BluRay's higher density and I like the fact that Microsoft had nothing to do with it. Yes, it's great that they have *limited* support for Linux on the PS3. Now, if only they'd allow GPU access. I remember reading that someone had unofficially figured out a way around being blocked out of it - anyone have any updates on this? I would be installing Linux on my PS3 right now, if not for this fact.
I can think of several developers right now work for a company called UGS who write OSS projects in their spare time.
Agreed. This is a good thing, IMHO. It can lead to companies donating programming time (aka money) to open source projects to assist in writing and/or submitting patches for software that the aforementioned companies make use of. That way, everyone wins. It doesn't have to be all or nothing - in fact, since I have to eat and pay bills, I'm rather for letting people pay for software. That allows me to keep living and contributing to open source projects. See a pattern here?
It might make it easier if people thought less in terms of profit (or lack thereof), and more in terms of our economy at large.