5 ms·

She seems to be advocating that Python do pretty much what Perl has ended up doing, which is "we have some batteries, but we haven't been adding new ones for a

by avar 7y ago

She seems to be advocating that Python do pretty much what Perl has ended up doing, which is "we have some batteries, but we haven't been adding new ones for a decade or more". The reasons are similar, it's a constant drag on core compiler development to need to support various batteries included that most core contributors aren't going to care about, so it's easier to tell people "use CPAN". There was even talk of "distros" for the interpreter. Where the core bits would be similar to what Linux is, and all the batteries would be provide as collections of add-on packages. Strangely enough these efforts seem to stop at OS distributors. They really seem to like to install just the one "compiler", and wouldn't stand for a project like Perl or Python telling them "we mean for you to distribute the core compiler plus these 100 packages, because that's what forms our 'language'". "Strangely" because you'd think they'd be the best positioned to make easy work of packaging up such a thing, and it shouldn't in principle make a difference if you need to install 100 RPMs / APTs by default.

jzl 7y ago
The idea of "distros" for python is interesting, and to a certain extent has already happened: just look at Anaconda. I've been using built-in environment isolation tools such as virtualenv for ages but have recently switched over to using miniconda for all things python. Among other things it has amazing support across all three major OS's, and I happen to be dealing with all three at any given time. Whether one uses miniconda, pipenv, virtualenv, or anything else like it, as far as I am concerned the days of ever using the system python are over. I will always create my own personal "distro" on the fly with full control over the python version and every add-on package.
- imiric 7y ago
  As a non-scientific user of pyenv[0], would I benefit from switching to Anaconda/miniconda? [0]: https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv
  - maximente 7y ago
    not likely IMO. i've found conda - which is their environment management tool - to be a hassle unless one needs specific numpy/scipy/GPU libs. i'm using pipsi and pew, although i'll look into pyenv.
    - kalefranz 7y ago
      Former conda dev lead here. Definitely interested in more details regarding what part of the conda experience you found to be a hassle, if you’re willing to share.
  - jzl 7y ago
    The default "Anaconda" install is like 7Gb after it grabs everything. Turnkey if you're using all that stuff anyway, but otherwise not particularly worth it. Miniconda on the other hand I'm finding meets my needs exactly. The base install is standard.
  - goerz 7y ago
    You don’t have to switch. You can install anaconda using pyenv, to get the best of both worlds.
- liveoneggs 7y ago
  https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonDistributions https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonDistributions
- mixmastamyk 7y ago
  > the days of ever using the system python are over You don’t have any Python scripts in your bin folder?
twic 7y ago
> There was even talk of "distros" for the interpreter. Where the core bits would be similar to what Linux is, and all the batteries would be provide as collections of add-on packages. Not a million miles from the modularisation that Java has been going through.
gcb0 7y ago
And perl solved that perfectly: just let the OS/distro solve the 100s of packages. And it have been solved, despite you claiming otherwise on your last paragraph. When did you have to use cpan in a modern system? Compare that to how many times you had to use pip. Now, if you use a crappy OS or distro (or god forbid, some container built by you have no idea who on top of nobody knows what) then yeah, you are bound to do the leg work yourself, but you will be doing that regardless of the language/subsystem you are trying to use in that case. Not to mention that it is the only way to do things professionally. For example, if you must have a system that parses XML but for company policy is not allowed to have even the means of performing a network request. With python you either have both xml and an http library and whatever else included and you will either have to do a special package with a striped down python+xml only or get a corporate exception. While on other languages you can install only the xml parser component package and your code will run happily and be compliant with company policy.
- majewsky 7y ago
  > When did you have to use cpan in a modern system? Compare that to how many times you had to use pip. Well yeah. A sizable amount of new software is still being written in Python. But when I use Perl software (besides my custom scripts), it's always stuff that's old enough that the distribution is carrying packages for it. If you disagree, please name a significant new software written in Perl that was released in the last, say, 5 years.
  - gcb0 7y ago
    name one package you missed in those 5 years. I see your comment as the goal, not the problem.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  > if you must have a system that parses XML but for company policy is not allowed to have even the means of performing a network request. With python you either have both xml and an http library and whatever else included and you will either have to do a special package with a striped down python+xml only or get a corporate exception. While on other languages you can install only the xml parser component package and your code will run happily and be compliant with company policy. ...wouldn't the company policy involve removing the means of performing a network request from the computer, making the notional capabilities of the software irrelevant? Python will let you drive network requests through the OS. It's just that you wouldn't normally want to.
marcosdumay 7y ago
That problem does not seem to happen with the Haskell Platform. Maybe it's because GHC has almost no batteries at all, so nobody thinks it's sufficient, or maybe it's because distros get it in a single package, so it does not feel like installing 100 libraries.

by avar 7y ago

jzl 7y ago

The idea of "distros" for python is interesting, and to a certain extent has already happened: just look at Anaconda. I've been using built-in environment isolation tools such as virtualenv for ages but have recently switched over to using miniconda for all things python. Among other things it has amazing support across all three major OS's, and I happen to be dealing with all three at any given time. Whether one uses miniconda, pipenv, virtualenv, or anything else like it, as far as I am concerned the days of ever using the system python are over. I will always create my own personal "distro" on the fly with full control over the python version and every add-on package.

imiric 7y ago
As a non-scientific user of pyenv[0], would I benefit from switching to Anaconda/miniconda? [0]: https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv
- maximente 7y ago
  not likely IMO. i've found conda - which is their environment management tool - to be a hassle unless one needs specific numpy/scipy/GPU libs. i'm using pipsi and pew, although i'll look into pyenv.
  - kalefranz 7y ago
    Former conda dev lead here. Definitely interested in more details regarding what part of the conda experience you found to be a hassle, if you’re willing to share.
- jzl 7y ago
  The default "Anaconda" install is like 7Gb after it grabs everything. Turnkey if you're using all that stuff anyway, but otherwise not particularly worth it. Miniconda on the other hand I'm finding meets my needs exactly. The base install is standard.
- goerz 7y ago
  You don’t have to switch. You can install anaconda using pyenv, to get the best of both worlds.
liveoneggs 7y ago
https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonDistributions https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonDistributions
mixmastamyk 7y ago
> the days of ever using the system python are over You don’t have any Python scripts in your bin folder?

twic 7y ago

> There was even talk of "distros" for the interpreter. Where the core bits would be similar to what Linux is, and all the batteries would be provide as collections of add-on packages. Not a million miles from the modularisation that Java has been going through.

gcb0 7y ago

And perl solved that perfectly: just let the OS/distro solve the 100s of packages. And it have been solved, despite you claiming otherwise on your last paragraph. When did you have to use cpan in a modern system? Compare that to how many times you had to use pip. Now, if you use a crappy OS or distro (or god forbid, some container built by you have no idea who on top of nobody knows what) then yeah, you are bound to do the leg work yourself, but you will be doing that regardless of the language/subsystem you are trying to use in that case. Not to mention that it is the only way to do things professionally. For example, if you must have a system that parses XML but for company policy is not allowed to have even the means of performing a network request. With python you either have both xml and an http library and whatever else included and you will either have to do a special package with a striped down python+xml only or get a corporate exception. While on other languages you can install only the xml parser component package and your code will run happily and be compliant with company policy.

majewsky 7y ago
> When did you have to use cpan in a modern system? Compare that to how many times you had to use pip. Well yeah. A sizable amount of new software is still being written in Python. But when I use Perl software (besides my custom scripts), it's always stuff that's old enough that the distribution is carrying packages for it. If you disagree, please name a significant new software written in Perl that was released in the last, say, 5 years.
- gcb0 7y ago
  name one package you missed in those 5 years. I see your comment as the goal, not the problem.
thaumasiotes 7y ago
> if you must have a system that parses XML but for company policy is not allowed to have even the means of performing a network request. With python you either have both xml and an http library and whatever else included and you will either have to do a special package with a striped down python+xml only or get a corporate exception. While on other languages you can install only the xml parser component package and your code will run happily and be compliant with company policy. ...wouldn't the company policy involve removing the means of performing a network request from the computer, making the notional capabilities of the software irrelevant? Python will let you drive network requests through the OS. It's just that you wouldn't normally want to.

marcosdumay 7y ago

That problem does not seem to happen with the Haskell Platform. Maybe it's because GHC has almost no batteries at all, so nobody thinks it's sufficient, or maybe it's because distros get it in a single package, so it does not feel like installing 100 libraries.