On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Steve Loughran <[email protected]> wrote:
> yes, we seem to agree on that
> http://steveloughran.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/pythonium-or-why-is-there-no-javash.html
I honestly don't understand what the problem is. For quite
complex projects like Jenkins, Gradle, Logstash, etc I've seen
the approach of fat jars turning out the best of both worlds:
$ java -jar jenkin.jar
and you're done.
Sure, you can try to tweak classpath, and garbage collection options, etc.
But why? Besides, there's plenty of options to the python executable
that can also be tweaked -- but once again for the use case we're talking
about -- shell replacement -- why would you do that?
I guess there's an issue of startup time -- bash/python seem to
startup a few sec. sooner, but it hasn't bothered me, honestly.
Thanks,
Roman.
P.S. I don't have any particular affinity to python as a language
(its features feel artificial to me) but as a platform it keeps
disappointing me. Here's a story from a week ago. As part of
Bigtop graduation I had to regenerate some docs in the incubator.
The script that does that happens to be a Python script. But
not any Python - python3 script. Which is fine since Ubuntu
packages python 3 and I though that:
# apt-get install python3
would just do the trick. Quite to my chagrin it didn't work:
$ python3 clutch.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "clutch.py", line 106, in <module>
import argparse
Apparently argparse is only available in Python3.2 (argparse is
SO new to python -- really?). So I was left with easy_install
route. Ok said I -- I don't want to clutter my system with
random easy_install artifacts -- so I'll create a virtualenv.
That didn't work either. Apparently the virtualenv script
that came with Ubuntu wasn't compatible with Python3.
At that point I gave up and ssh'ed into the latest Fedora :-(
I honestly still am very interested in how I could've
made it work on my old Ubuntu 10.04. Thoughts?
