4 ms·

I don't get it, I thought this was a port of Processing to Python, but then the installation instruction says: > If you have Java 17 installed on your computer

by p4bl0 2y ago

I don't get it, I thought this was a port of Processing to Python, but then the installation instruction says: > If you have Java 17 installed on your computer, you can install py5 using pip: So it still depends on Java? Is this like a Python wrapper for Processing? UPDATE: Got the explanation. From another page on the website: > Py5 is a creative coding framework for Python 3.9+. Its use and functionality is analogous to the widely used Processing framework. It is a Python version of Processing. > Internally py5 uses Processing’s core libraries, which are written in Java, while providing the end user with a (mostly) seamless Python programming experience. Emphasis is mine. The wording in the first paragraph (which is the same as on the project's home page) seems ambiguous to me. Reading it I would really not expect a Java dependency.

animal_spirits 2y ago
Yep. In case you don’t want to write Java you can do it in Python. But it uses the same engine
- jszymborski 2y ago
  I suppose jython would be particularly useful in such cases
  - stuaxo 2y ago
    People have got Processing working Jython (I played with it myself a very long time ago). Jython itself is making it's way to a python 3.x implementation but it doesn't seem to be quite there for general consumption, though maybe for some creative coding things this isn't a problem, for myself I'd need to wait until it's ready. If you are able, I'd recommend contributing to the Jython 3 work.
    - gbear605 2y ago
      Check out GraalPy, part of the GraalVM project. My company has switched from Jython to GraalPy with relatively little work.
  - make3 2y ago
    using Jython prevents you from using the regular Python ecosystem though
  - animal_spirits 2y ago
    I've also worked with a python->javascript transpiler and hooked it into p5.js if your more into that
kdlafan 2y ago
It seems like an axiom that no Python package can be written that does not depend on C/C++/Java doing the real work.
- noitpmeder 2y ago
  Why would you rewrite something that already exists? It'd be a different story if the library evolved naturally starting with python, which it very much might if it was created today.
- nomel 2y ago
  Python is successful because everyone is aware that it has relatively terrible performance. As a result, anything remotely heavy is put into performant libraries that use not-python, leaving a nice glue language with fast libraries. If you have something CPU bound, and it's python code hitting that ceiling, you're probably throwing away 10x performance [1]. That's ok, because anyone that cares about performance doesn't do that (or quickly learns). [1] https://programming-language-benchmarks.vercel.app/cpp-vs-python https://programming-language-benchmarks.vercel.app/cpp-vs-py...

by p4bl0 2y ago

animal_spirits 2y ago

Yep. In case you don’t want to write Java you can do it in Python. But it uses the same engine

jszymborski 2y ago
I suppose jython would be particularly useful in such cases
- stuaxo 2y ago
  People have got Processing working Jython (I played with it myself a very long time ago). Jython itself is making it's way to a python 3.x implementation but it doesn't seem to be quite there for general consumption, though maybe for some creative coding things this isn't a problem, for myself I'd need to wait until it's ready. If you are able, I'd recommend contributing to the Jython 3 work.
  - gbear605 2y ago
    Check out GraalPy, part of the GraalVM project. My company has switched from Jython to GraalPy with relatively little work.
- make3 2y ago
  using Jython prevents you from using the regular Python ecosystem though
- animal_spirits 2y ago
  I've also worked with a python->javascript transpiler and hooked it into p5.js if your more into that

kdlafan 2y ago

It seems like an axiom that no Python package can be written that does not depend on C/C++/Java doing the real work.

noitpmeder 2y ago
Why would you rewrite something that already exists? It'd be a different story if the library evolved naturally starting with python, which it very much might if it was created today.
nomel 2y ago
Python is successful because everyone is aware that it has relatively terrible performance. As a result, anything remotely heavy is put into performant libraries that use not-python, leaving a nice glue language with fast libraries. If you have something CPU bound, and it's python code hitting that ceiling, you're probably throwing away 10x performance [1]. That's ok, because anyone that cares about performance doesn't do that (or quickly learns). [1] https://programming-language-benchmarks.vercel.app/cpp-vs-python https://programming-language-benchmarks.vercel.app/cpp-vs-py...