Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
J Kenneth King wrote: Stef Mientki writes: So, the question is, can the same thing be done for Python apps? I love Python and all, but it'd be apt to ask, what's the point? The iPhone is running on what? A 400Mhz ARM processor? Resources on the device are already limited; running your program on top of an embedded Python interpreter would only be adding pressure to the constraints; even if it was an optimized interpreter. I don't know iPhone, but I've done some experiments with 400 MHz arm, running Windows Mobile, and found PocketPyGUI running very very well on these devices. cheers, Stef Mientki Sure, but it's pretty relative in the sense that it might be fast enough if I'm sitting around but too slow if I want to enter some information in the app before the next train comes. As a programmer, I don't really see the benefit of using an embedded interpreter on the iPhone. Objective-C isn't the greatest language, but it's easy to learn and well supported. It also compiles into some pretty speedy executables. If you can sacrifice a little run-time speed for your users in exchange for ease of development on your part, all the more to you. My original point was that I don't see the benefit in that decision. ok 20 years ago I might have agreed with you, but now a days, speed of development is a much more important decision maker than speed of execution ;-) cheers, Stef -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
Stef Mientki writes: >>> So, the question is, can the same thing be done for Python apps? >>> >> >> I love Python and all, but it'd be apt to ask, what's the point? >> >> The iPhone is running on what? A 400Mhz ARM processor? Resources on the >> device are already limited; running your program on top of an embedded >> Python interpreter would only be adding pressure to the constraints; >> even if it was an optimized interpreter. >> > I don't know iPhone, > but I've done some experiments with 400 MHz arm, running Windows Mobile, > and found PocketPyGUI running very very well on these devices. > > cheers, > Stef Mientki Sure, but it's pretty relative in the sense that it might be fast enough if I'm sitting around but too slow if I want to enter some information in the app before the next train comes. As a programmer, I don't really see the benefit of using an embedded interpreter on the iPhone. Objective-C isn't the greatest language, but it's easy to learn and well supported. It also compiles into some pretty speedy executables. If you can sacrifice a little run-time speed for your users in exchange for ease of development on your part, all the more to you. My original point was that I don't see the benefit in that decision. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
So, the question is, can the same thing be done for Python apps? I love Python and all, but it'd be apt to ask, what's the point? The iPhone is running on what? A 400Mhz ARM processor? Resources on the device are already limited; running your program on top of an embedded Python interpreter would only be adding pressure to the constraints; even if it was an optimized interpreter. I don't know iPhone, but I've done some experiments with 400 MHz arm, running Windows Mobile, and found PocketPyGUI running very very well on these devices. cheers, Stef Mientki -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
> If you do write the interpreter, let me know. I would certainly experiment > with it. +2 over here! Malcolm -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
Dr Mephesto writes: > Sure, I am learning Objective C already, but the syntax is really > unfriendly after python. > > I think it really depends on the type of app you want to write. > Anything held back by network delays or that sits around waiting for > user input are perfectly acceptable target apps. If you need speed for > something really intensive, falling back to C is still much nicer than > coding in Objective C. I agree that having a certain basic > understanding of objective C is a must, but having the option to use a > coder-friendly language like Ruby or Python can cut development time > dramatically. > > If Ruby can do it (and it generally slower than python), why can > Python also get a legal iPhone interpreter? It can if you want to write the interpreter. I just don't see the point. I can understand wanting a higher level language than assembler or maybe even C, but that's precisely what Objective-C is. Unfortunately, while the hardware for these mobile platforms is getting better these days, it's still not where it needs to be to run programs written in interpreted languages, IMO. Users typically only interact with an app for around two minutes at a time. Your app needs to be as fast as it can be. It's one of the few areas of software development today where optimizations can be justified (the other are games and scientific computing). Trust me, if there were an SMS app for the iPhone that loaded faster than the one that ships with it, guaranteed it would sell like hot-cakes (if Apple would let it in the store of course). If you do write the interpreter, let me know. I would certainly experiment with it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
> a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) (A) wrote: >A> In article <85ljn0ej4h@agentultra.com>, >A> J Kenneth King wrote: >>> >>> The iPhone is running on what? A 400Mhz ARM processor? Resources on the >>> device are already limited; running your program on top of an embedded >>> Python interpreter would only be adding pressure to the constraints; >>> even if it was an optimized interpreter. >A> Ten years ago, a 400MHz ARM processor would have been >A> fast, and it would have been running Python 1.5.2. My first Python experience at home was on a 40MHz 80486 (Python 1.5.2 I think). It was a bit slow :=( -- Piet van Oostrum URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: p...@vanoostrum.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
In article <85ljn0ej4h@agentultra.com>, J Kenneth King wrote: > >The iPhone is running on what? A 400Mhz ARM processor? Resources on the >device are already limited; running your program on top of an embedded >Python interpreter would only be adding pressure to the constraints; >even if it was an optimized interpreter. Ten years ago, a 400MHz ARM processor would have been fast, and it would have been running Python 1.5.2. -- Aahz (a...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "as long as we like the same operating system, things are cool." --piranha -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
Sure, I am learning Objective C already, but the syntax is really unfriendly after python. I think it really depends on the type of app you want to write. Anything held back by network delays or that sits around waiting for user input are perfectly acceptable target apps. If you need speed for something really intensive, falling back to C is still much nicer than coding in Objective C. I agree that having a certain basic understanding of objective C is a must, but having the option to use a coder-friendly language like Ruby or Python can cut development time dramatically. If Ruby can do it (and it generally slower than python), why can Python also get a legal iPhone interpreter? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python/pyobjC Apps on iPhone now a possibility?
Dr Mephesto writes: > I have been following the discussion about python and pyobjc on the > iphone, and it seemed to me that the app-store rules prohibited > embedded interpreters; so, python apps are a no-no. > > But now it seems that the Rubyists have the option that we don't. It > seems there is a company, http://rhomobile.com/home, that has an SDK > that allows ruby programs to be embedded together with an interpreter > in an app! More interesting is the fact that several of these hybrid > apps seem to have been accepted on the itunes app store. > > Here's a quote from a representative, found on this blog: > http://www.rubyinside.com/rhodes-develop-full-iphone-rim-and-symbian-apps-using-ruby-1475.html > > "...First of all, to clarify, we precompile all framework and app code > down to Ruby 1.9 VM bytecode. This yields great performance > advantages. We also disable eval and other dynamic execution aspects > of Ruby. In the end, on all platforms your app gets compiled with our > framework all into one single executable, indistinguishable from any > other executable. > > But even if we were shipping a fullon Ruby interpreter without > compiling to bytecode and leaving dynamic evaluation enabled (as has > been well remarked in the blogosphere by now) App Store rule 3.3.2 > does not disallow interpreters but only downloading code to be > executed by the interpreter." > > So, the question is, can the same thing be done for Python apps? I love Python and all, but it'd be apt to ask, what's the point? The iPhone is running on what? A 400Mhz ARM processor? Resources on the device are already limited; running your program on top of an embedded Python interpreter would only be adding pressure to the constraints; even if it was an optimized interpreter. Might as well just suck it up and learn C/Objective-C .. it's really not that hard. It took me about a day to pick up the language and another two or three to finagle with the libraries. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
