Tim Roberts wrote: > Michael Foord wrote: > >> Tim Roberts wrote: >> >>> >>> Well, there's an interesting issue here. Much of the new stuff you >>> have mentioned has nothing to do with the Python that we know and >>> love. .NET and winforms (which is part of .NET) requires managed >>> code, and that means IronPython. IronPython is NOT the same as >>> Python; although the language is the same, the library and the >>> idiomatic usage are so very different that it's difficult for one >>> person to be competent in both. >>> >>> >>> >> Hmmm... that hasn't been my experience. Programming IronPython with >> idiomatic Python works very well. >> > > Perhaps the issue is more than I'm not comfortable with idiomatic .NET. > I did take a semi-serious stab at working with WPF in IronPython, but it > just wasn't comfortable. > > I am very pleased to see that an IronPython book is in the works. > Because I think WPF is one of the most exciting things to come out of > Microsoft in a very long time, I will be among the first in line. > > Ok. Personally I have found that I can still *basically* use idiomatic Python when working with .NET classes. The exception is when optimizing as the performance profiles of IronPython vs CPython are very different.
<advert>"The IronPython Book" is already available in "early access" preview form and the WPF chapter will appear in the preview in the next couple of weeks or so - http://www.manning.com/foord </advert> Michael _______________________________________________ python-win32 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-win32
