[Python.NET] Is Python .NET Alive?

Discussion:

Kenny Koller

2012-05-16 01:30:05 UTC

_________________________________________________
Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet-+ZN9ApsXKcEdnm+***@public.gmane.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet

Barton

2012-05-16 02:34:28 UTC

Permalink

Nope, it's not dying. Still actively maintained, accepting patches (and
applying them when I get a chance).
On the other hand, I've heard it rumored that IronClad is not as active
due to IronPython work to integrate SciPy and NumPy???

You've hit on the real beauty of this package - no bloat
and the downside - no installer on Windows and limited docs.
It will drop right into your /pythonxx/dlls folder on Windows. There's a
setup.py for Linux install.

The list is active for questions. Although I'm not an imbedder, I've had
great success calling .NET/Mono libs from python.

It's certainly worth some quick experimentation to see if it will meet
your needs.
Have fun!

Hi,
I'm currently trying to access both a managed and unmanaged DLL. The
former gives me access to a high resolution encoder via USB and the
latter our motion control system also via USB using ctypes.
I'll need to mix this kind of this often during our development cycle
and I'm looking for a long term solution.
IronPython works surprisingly well but I'm not sure IronClad is quite
there to give me access to ctypes. Also the load time is slow when
running scripts quickly back-to-back which I do often.
Python for .NET looks to be a nice solution because I can access the
CPython stuff without worry but I find the documentation lacking and
it's unclear how active this project is. On the documentation side I
just find these .zip downloads but I could not find the installers that
are mentioned to integrate with an existing 2.7 installation Python.
So is this dying? Will you share with me why you are using this rather
than IronPython?
I hope this doesn't sound harsh. I think these kinds of efforts are
fantastic.
Thanks,
Kenny
_________________________________________________
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet

_________________________________________________
Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet-+ZN9ApsXKcEdnm+***@public.gmane.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet

Brian Lloyd

2012-05-16 03:11:00 UTC

Permalink

Not dying -- its just a flesh wound! :^) At the end of the day Python for
.NET is a pretty niche thing, so there is not a ton of activity, but Barton
and others have been really great about giving it some cycles and being
responsive to people on the list. The project predates IronPython, so that
may be the de-facto answer for why some people have chosen to use it. In
any case, there are plenty of people using it to solve some interesting
integration problems. If the current code can bridge your gap, it's worth
giving it a shot.

That said, if you think you will need to be tracking the leading edge of
either Python or .NET development then Python for .NET or IronPython might
not be the right path, as right now I'm not sure either project has enough
contributors with enough "skin in the game" to commit to significant
upgrades (support for Python 3.x, future versions of .NET/CLR etc.). In
that case you might be better off wrapping your motion control lib using
the unsafe / FFI features of the CLR directly rather than mucking with
ctypes. Not to scare you off, just my 0.02 ;^)

- Brian

Hi,
I'm currently trying to access both a managed and unmanaged DLL. The
former gives me access to a high resolution encoder via USB and the latter
our motion control system also via USB using ctypes.
I'll need to mix this kind of this often during our development cycle and
I'm looking for a long term solution.
IronPython works surprisingly well but I'm not sure IronClad is quite
there to give me access to ctypes. Also the load time is slow when running
scripts quickly back-to-back which I do often.
Python for .NET looks to be a nice solution because I can access the
CPython stuff without worry but I find the documentation lacking and it's
unclear how active this project is. On the documentation side I just find
these .zip downloads but I could not find the installers that are mentioned
to integrate with an existing 2.7 installation Python.
So is this dying? Will you share with me why you are using this rather
than IronPython?
I hope this doesn't sound harsh. I think these kinds of efforts are
fantastic.
Thanks,
Kenny
_________________________________________________
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet

--
Brian Lloyd
brian.d.lloyd-***@public.gmane.org
(c) 540.845.2975

Brad Friedman

2012-05-16 04:24:12 UTC

Permalink

MoCo eh? You may want to look into cython. It's a good complimentary tech. I find that looking for binary releases of python.net is futile. I do the equivalent of static compiling into my projects.

Even if you get the right python version... 32 vs 64? Pyuic 2 vs 4? Too many variables.

If you do the "right thing" and listen to supported version info, you can't get a single module built binary compatible between RHEL linux's python, and autodesk Maya's statically linked python. Why should python.net work without compiling separate versions too?

Once you accept that c python isn't binary compatible with itself, compiling python.net into your apps and environment makes a lot more sense.

You might also consider RPC approaches. Pickle works in both. I've considered looking into pyro to communicate between cpython and iron python as well. I keep coming back to python.net though.

Hi,
I'm currently trying to access both a managed and unmanaged DLL. The former gives me access to a high resolution encoder via USB and the latter our motion control system also via USB using ctypes.
I'll need to mix this kind of this often during our development cycle and I'm looking for a long term solution.
IronPython works surprisingly well but I'm not sure IronClad is quite there to give me access to ctypes. Also the load time is slow when running scripts quickly back-to-back which I do often.
Python for .NET looks to be a nice solution because I can access the CPython stuff without worry but I find the documentation lacking and it's unclear how active this project is. On the documentation side I just find these .zip downloads but I could not find the installers that are mentioned to integrate with an existing 2.7 installation Python.
So is this dying? Will you share with me why you are using this rather than IronPython?
I hope this doesn't sound harsh. I think these kinds of efforts are fantastic.
Thanks,
Kenny
_________________________________________________
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet

Bradley Friedman

2012-05-16 05:50:20 UTC

Permalink

Sorry. That would be ucs4 vs ucs2. Never post to a mailing list drunk or risk confusing obscure Unicode protocols with obscure pyqt tools. Learn from my mistakes.

Sent from my iPad

Post by Brad Friedman
MoCo eh? You may want to look into cython. It's a good complimentary tech. I find that looking for binary releases of python.net is futile. I do the equivalent of static compiling into my projects.
Even if you get the right python version... 32 vs 64? Pyuic 2 vs 4? Too many variables.
If you do the "right thing" and listen to supported version info, you can't get a single module built binary compatible between RHEL linux's python, and autodesk Maya's statically linked python. Why should python.net work without compiling separate versions too?
Once you accept that c python isn't binary compatible with itself, compiling python.net into your apps and environment makes a lot more sense.
You might also consider RPC approaches. Pickle works in both. I've considered looking into pyro to communicate between cpython and iron python as well. I keep coming back to python.net though.

Hi,
I'm currently trying to access both a managed and unmanaged DLL. The former gives me access to a high resolution encoder via USB and the latter our motion control system also via USB using ctypes.
I'll need to mix this kind of this often during our development cycle and I'm looking for a long term solution.
IronPython works surprisingly well but I'm not sure IronClad is quite there to give me access to ctypes. Also the load time is slow when running scripts quickly back-to-back which I do often.
Python for .NET looks to be a nice solution because I can access the CPython stuff without worry but I find the documentation lacking and it's unclear how active this project is. On the documentation side I just find these .zip downloads but I could not find the installers that are mentioned to integrate with an existing 2.7 installation Python.
So is this dying? Will you share with me why you are using this rather than IronPython?
I hope this doesn't sound harsh. I think these kinds of efforts are fantastic.
Thanks,
Kenny
_________________________________________________
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet

_________________________________________________
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet