4 ms·

> which they could have done with Python I don't think they could have created a statically-linked Python binary that contained the entire Python installation

> which they could have done with Python I don't think they could have created a statically-linked Python binary that contained the entire Python installation and core libraries, and the entire application in less than 5 MB. The entire app in a self-contained executable. No futzing with PYTHONPATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, virtualenv, installation, conflicting with the system-installed Python, etc. That's what Lua let them do. But don't take it from me. Here is Guido van Rossum last year: > The final question was about what he hates in Python. "Anything to do with package distribution", he answered immediately. There are problems with version skew and dependencies that just make for an "endless mess". He dreads it when a colleague comes to him with a "simple Python question". Half the time it is some kind of import path problem and there is no easy solution to offer. https://lwn.net/Articles/651967/ https://lwn.net/Articles/651967/

dottrap 11y ago
Not to mention, on Windows too.
mixmastamyk 11y ago
PyInstaller, Py2exe.
- dottrap 11y ago
  No system installation is required with Lua. It can be built into your app.
  - vetinari 11y ago
    Neither is it required with PyInstaller/Py2exe.
    - monkmartinez 11y ago
      As of last year, these options were not very good either... perhaps the situation has changed? The reality is distribution for Python apps is not good. https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use.html https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use...
      - mixmastamyk 11y ago
        That article's dismissal of py2exe is false.
        BuckRogers 11y ago
        This is really meant for monkmartinez, but you're right. I'd like to add, that blog can be dismissed outright. It's also out of date in regards to PyInstaller. It does support Python3 now. 2.7;3.3-3.5. I've used PyInstaller for years and prefer it over the other packaging solutions, it's really good. I wouldn't be digging up old blogs as a source for dirt and relying on any information within without verifying it was or still is true.
      - vetinari 11y ago
        In cca 2005 timeframe we used to ship py2exe-d windows desktop application (using wxwidgets framework), with exactly zero issues. The target was a wide range of windows releases, from 95(!) to XP. I haven't seen any of problems mentioned in the blog post.
- haberman 11y ago
  5MB. Including libuv, zlib, openssl, and pcre.
- monkmartinez 11y ago
  Those are not good options, seriously lacking in one form or another. Don't take my word for it: https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use.html https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use...
  - mixmastamyk 11y ago
    I've used py2exe extensively and was happy with it. I also used it with python 2.x despite the article's assertion. You can also zip an app (think .jar) since 2.6, with the zippap module available in 3.5.
  - Lofkin 11y ago
    Nuitka?

dottrap 11y ago

Not to mention, on Windows too.

mixmastamyk 11y ago

PyInstaller, Py2exe.

dottrap 11y ago
No system installation is required with Lua. It can be built into your app.
- vetinari 11y ago
  Neither is it required with PyInstaller/Py2exe.
  - monkmartinez 11y ago
    As of last year, these options were not very good either... perhaps the situation has changed? The reality is distribution for Python apps is not good. https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use.html https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use...
    - mixmastamyk 11y ago
      That article's dismissal of py2exe is false.
      - BuckRogers 11y ago
        This is really meant for monkmartinez, but you're right. I'd like to add, that blog can be dismissed outright. It's also out of date in regards to PyInstaller. It does support Python3 now. 2.7;3.3-3.5. I've used PyInstaller for years and prefer it over the other packaging solutions, it's really good. I wouldn't be digging up old blogs as a source for dirt and relying on any information within without verifying it was or still is true.
    - vetinari 11y ago
      In cca 2005 timeframe we used to ship py2exe-d windows desktop application (using wxwidgets framework), with exactly zero issues. The target was a wide range of windows releases, from 95(!) to XP. I haven't seen any of problems mentioned in the blog post.
haberman 11y ago
5MB. Including libuv, zlib, openssl, and pcre.
monkmartinez 11y ago
Those are not good options, seriously lacking in one form or another. Don't take my word for it: https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use.html https://glyph.twistedmatrix.com/2015/09/software-you-can-use...
- mixmastamyk 11y ago
  I've used py2exe extensively and was happy with it. I also used it with python 2.x despite the article's assertion. You can also zip an app (think .jar) since 2.6, with the zippap module available in 3.5.
- Lofkin 11y ago
  Nuitka?