[IAEP] Sugarized binaries? was Re: users doing python in XOs

James Simmons nicestep at gmail.com
Mon Dec 3 10:59:56 EST 2012


I have no trouble defending Python.  I've been programming for a living for
30+ years and I've done COBOL, Basic Assembly Language, Fortran, BASIC,
Turbo C, C++, Objective C, Visual Basic, Java, Python, and probably some
other stuff I can't remember.  Of the lot of them Python best represents
low floor no ceiling.  It is easy to learn for a beginner, supports (but
does not require) object oriented programming, and does not have
abominations like GO TO line number (or ALTER GO TO.  Don't get me started
on COBOL).  It is a suitable language for a professional programmer to
use.  Google uses it quite a bit.  IBM uses JYTHON (a Python interpreter
written in Java) as a scripting language for its WebSphere product.  Django
lets you write web applications in Python, including Booktype (used by
FLOSS Manuals).  There's a ton of good stuff written in Python.  I used to
run the Freevo media center and that was all Python.

It is pointless to ask if it is the one programming language to have if you
could only have one.  If you're going to program for a living you need to
learn more than one language.  I would go so far to say that until you've
learned three languages you won't be able to truly master your first one.

Of course if you don't intend to program for a living Python is an even
better choice.

Compiled languages do run faster than interpreted, but even on an XO laptop
that isn't as big an issue as it used to be.

James Simmons

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Yama Ploskonka <yamaplos at gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I have no intention to rewrite Sugar
> activities.
> Thank you for your concern.
> No worry no more. I learned that my relevant target audience for
> Sugarizing RPMs, kids potential microcontroller developers in Uruguay, no
> longer are limited by the block Ceibal has put on sudo in XOs.
> Because they don't use XOs anymore.
> They use Ubuntu, on Classmates.
> As to the background, my personal experience with compiled vs. interpreted
> is that compiled runs faster.
> So, if you compile your code (I remember how excited we were when one of
> our pals discovered this compiler for Basic, back when) it would "improve"
> things.
> No idea if there is such a thing as a compiler that will take Python as
> source, but nowadays it becomes a moot point, for me, to Sugarize things.
> People free to use sudo, will use sudo.
> The others use Ubuntu. They both use Terminal and don't even notice the
> silly overhead the GUI causes them, but since the binaries are so fast in
> compiling, it doesn't really matter.
> A few XO users are lost - I don't have the skills to help them, sorry.
> as to the specialized use, well, I really don't know, not being of that
> persuasion, if it is or is not.
> As to real world use of accessing the code by kids to make modifications
> directly on their own XOs, I agree it was a *nice* idea (I loved it when I
> heard about it)
> thank you again!
> On 12/02/2012 02:33 PM, Martin Dengler wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 10:57:39AM -0600, Yama Ploskonka wrote:
>>> On 12/02/2012 08:13 AM, Martin Dengler wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 10:08:07PM -0600, Yama Ploskonka wrote:
>>>>> If it is defunct, can we use binaries finally to optimize and speed
>>>>> up operation
>>>> "Using binaries" is not what needs to be done.  "Rewriting each
>>>> activity" (that you want to speed up) is what you're saying needs to
>>>> be done.  That's a lot more work than just finding the bottlenecks in
>>>> existing python applications and reducing them.
>>> [no response]
>> <shrug>
>>  with lesser importance, my authorities were that C and variants are
>>> faaaaar ahead [...] of anything else [...], as "the language for the
>>> real world" right now [...] I'm surprised to hear otherwise
>> Of course C is the most popular (by lines written, and usefulness as a
>> "desert island language"), and nobody say anything but.
>>  [...] but then there are specialized applications, I agree, and
>>> opinions :-)
>> Specialized applications like a constuctivist learning platform,
>> perhaps?
>>  I quote the Python link: “It’s still a relatively niche skill-set
>>> and demand isn’t astronomical [...]"
>> Your tiobe.com reference categorizes python as a "mainstream
>> language".  If you're asking about re-writing major/all Sugar
>> activities, we'd better have more to argue about than that.
>> Martin
> ______________________________**_________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/**listinfo/iaep<http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20121203/eb5f565f/attachment.html>

More information about the IAEP mailing list