Let's not push Dino or Bill to say anything; This is a enough of a high-profile issue that I'm sure Microsoft's PR firms are working on this. Unfortunately, we'll just have to be patient.
~Jimmy On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Eyvind Axelsen <[email protected]>wrote: > So, no response from the IPY team on this issue? > > > > Eyvind. > > > > *Fra:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *På vegne av* yngipy hernan > *Sendt:* 10. august 2010 05:46 > *Til:* Discussion of IronPython > *Emne:* Re: [IronPython] IronPython / DLR Direction > > > > I completely agree with IPy being Microsoft-supported lowers the barrier of > entry to enterprise use. I have this problem long time back using Python as > the company is a Microsoft shop (mostly). But IronPython being Microsoft > pretty much is approved already, no question ask. > > > > I am hoping to hear that IronPython will be supported by MS in the next 2 > to 5 years or longer ( forever :-) ) if possible. > > > > -yngipy > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Hank Fay <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tony, > > > > I have to agree about the barrier being lower if IPy is Microsoft-supported > (as all the Iron* languages were announced to be). I had a discussion in > January with a market-leader in another country, and their project manager > could accept IronPython, barely. His take was: I want to be able to easily > hire programmers for customization and/or sourcecode escrow clause > necessity. Customization wasn't really an issue (the program uses hooks for > customization), as he could hire his bevy of C# developers to do that, but > if he had to maintain sourcecode that would be a different story. > > > > Having come from a very productive dynamic language (Visual FoxPro) that MS > first said could not be ported to .Net, and then when it obviously was > possible (in 2005) made no attempt to do so, I'm having a deja vu experience > all over again. I'll try not to be as cynical and sarcastic as last time, > but I'm having to hold my arm down (shades of Dr. Strangelove) and hold my > tongue to prevent shouting out "Middle Management Uber Alles!" (referencing > Jimmy's blog post). > > > > And so it goes... > > > > Hank > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Tony Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Jeff Hardy <[email protected]> wrote: > > if [Iron*] die, doesn't that mean MS made the right choice after all? > > I don't think that's true. .NET isn't just another platform - it's > Microsoft's own platform. Some thoughts: > > Like it or not, and whether it *should* be the case or not, in many > organisations (or even teams) if a technology is from Microsoft then > it's automatically approved, or at least much easier to approve. The > barrier to using Iron* is much lower because they are Microsoft > products - this is even more the case with Visual Studio integration. > > Although Iron* are open-source (which is great, obviously), they > aren't typical open-source communities, because of the (somewhat > understandable) restriction about accepting code, and the leadership > all (AFAIK) being within Microsoft. Microsoft have created this > environment (which has worked fairly well so far), and it's not clear > how easily that can transition to something that's lead by someone (or > ones) outside of Microsoft. > > Leadership (or at least involvement) within Microsoft opens > opportunities for Iron* development to influence .NET. I'm not overly > familiar with the details, but I gather than the DLR approach is > significantly superior to the IPy 1 CLR approach, and that some of the > new dynamic features of C# have benefited from this. It's hard to see > how a community IronPython could have developed the DLR, and it seems > unlikely that Microsoft would make changes to the CLR to assist it. > (Does the latest Microsoft Javascript engine use the DLR (Managed > JScript?) - if so, then there's hope, I guess). > > Projects often need 'angels', especially in the early stages (and I > would argue that Iron* are still in early stages). Working on a > project of this size takes a lot of resources, and having corporate > sponsors makes that a lot easier. Would Python have succeeded if CWI, > CNRI, and BeOpen hadn't supported Guido (and others)'s work in the > early days? These days the PSF takes this role, but projects need > time to build to that sort of size. > > [Iron]Python (I don't really know much about [Iron]Ruby) is a great > language for beginners (students, kids, hobbyists, etc). The Iron > variants provide a very smooth path into other .NET development (e.g. > C# - which I would say is not at all a great beginner's language). > You could argue that Visual Basic provides this functionality as well > - I personally find Python much superior to Visual Basic, and since > nearly all other BASIC variants are dead now, it doesn't provide an > easy road into the .NET world (you have to start there with an > unfamiliar language). > > This last point is the most relevant to me. Over the last few years, > NorthTec have switched to using CPython as the first-course > programming language, and IronPython as the second-course language. > The students *need* to end up with some .NET and Visual Studio > experience, because realistically that's what they are most likely to > come across in the real world. Many of the students are not capable > of starting with C#. If IronPython wasn't a Microsoft project, it > would have been considerably more difficult to adopt it - that would > likely have meant using Visual Basic (possibly in both courses, > because these students struggle learning two languages in their first > year). Although this is my unique case, I suspect that there are > similar ones, where being a Microsoft product is a deciding factor in > whether Iron* can be used (which then impacts the adoption of the > language, and therefore whether the language survives). > > > > I think Microsoft is throwing their weight behind JavaScript as their > > dynamic language of choice, and I can't really blame them. > > My hope is that Microsoft realises they have enough weight to throw it > in more than once place. > > (My longer hope, which I know is quite unlikely, is that Windows 8 or > 9 includes some version of Iron* out of the box, like OS X includes > Python/Perl/PHP/Ruby/etc. Being able to distribute .py[co] files > rather than .exes would significantly help Iron* adoption IMO (and > this is something completely impossible for a non-Microsoft Iron*). I > know some people must like PowerShell and similar things could be done > with it, but it's not the same as having a language with the power and > cross-platform nature of Python). > > Cheers, > Tony > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
