REAL Linux

[Andrew Hammond]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 3-Oct-05, at 18:08, psema4 wrote:

> Python's one of the main reason's I'm heading over to Seneca's OSS
> Symposium this month.  It'll be nice to finally take a look at it.
>
> I don't know about the runtime situation - at first glance, it looks
> like it's producing static executables, but will have to spend some
> time and get a better idea of how "bad" the output is.


Python is a scripting language. Like many scripting languages, it can  
be compiled to bytecode, but it still requires an interpreter to run.

I'm wondering if by "bad" you're talking about execution speed. Many  
of python's critics point to benchmarks which demonstrate that a  
program written in python runs slower than a similar program written  
in whatever language they happen to be looking at.

The limiting factor in the vast majority of computing related  
problems is not runtime speed.

>> I don't think this is at all the kind of thing Linux (or Windows for
>> that matter) needs.
>>
>
> Whether any OS needs it or not, the tool's exist.  Either programmers
> can make them useful, or non-programmers will.  :S


You assume that non-programmers have the capacity to make such tools  
useful. However, I'd suggest that there are people who simply do not  
think in a way that allow them to do anything like programming.  
Unless your RAD tool finds a completely new way of either doing or at  
least representing the process of computing, it will not enable these  
people.


>>> In addition to the standard GUI and database components, it includes
>>> components for building games, internet applications, etc.
>>>
>>
>> Tools to let non programmers think they can write programs are not  
>> that
>> useful in my opinion because they don't make people good programers.
>>
>
> Agreed, though there's nothing but education and experience to make a
> good programmer.  Programming concepts are mostly not specific to any
> tool or language though.


Programming paradigms are often suggested, facilitated or even  
enforced by languages. For example, it requires quite a bit of effort  
to do object oriented programming in c, however it's almost  
impossible to avoid in python.

However I should point out that some peoples thought processes just  
do not map very well to the methods that computer science has to date  
discovered.


>>> The programmer in me definately agrees we don't need any more horrid
>>> code.  On the other hand, my advocate side is thinking this is a  
>>> good
>>> thing for the desktop.
>>>
>>
>> Because desktop users expect crappy applications?
>>
>
> Not really.  Because after hearing about linux often enough they'll
> take a look.  The more similarities that exist between desktop
> applications (on linux, mac, 'doze) the easier it will be for them to
> migrate from one OS to another.
>
> If I could count the number of times I've had "average" home users
> look at linux, only to watch them fall back to windows because app-x
> doesn't work anything like it does on windows...

Perhaps that is because windows suites their needs better? Helping  
users define and then meet their needs is the only form of advocacy  
that makes sense to me.

__________________________________________________
Andrew Hammond    416-673-4138    ahammond-swQf4SbcV9C7WVzo/KQ3Mw at public.gmane.org
Data Services Group Manager, Afilias Canada Corp.
CB83 2838 4B67 D40F D086 3568 81FC E7E5 27AF 4A9A

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDRD0Pgfzn5SevSpoRAgWvAJ91BK57EKW8sLvwSm1tmpQ9zZUJcQCgmLQX
mKUQaJp3G403YLZljstRDnc=
=cxsR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml