3 ms·

I was just looking at the status of IronPython, and it's on Python 3.4, which has been end-of-life for nearly five years. I'm not sure that indicates practical

by saila 3y ago

I was just looking at the status of IronPython, and it's on Python 3.4, which has been end-of-life for nearly five years. I'm not sure that indicates practical usability for most developers. Only C#, VB, and maybe F# actually seem like a safe choice on .NET. (PowerShell too, but that's a different use case.) So, just because something has been, or can be, done "in theory" doesn't mean all that much. Unless you were intending this as a criticism of .NET? I could see WASM actually pulling this off.

ejiblabahaba 3y ago
IronPython is indeed quite a pain to work with, and for a lot of reasons beyond the age. For instance, you don't get numpy or any dependencies that themselves depend on quirks of CPython. The alternative is PythonNET, which executes python in CPython context, but provides nearly the same interoperability* with CLR assemblies. There's many devils in the details of that asterisk, and I'm frankly not knowledgeable enough to explain them; but in my experience, things work well enough that I'm satisfied with the integration provided.