RE: Prothon is switching to the .NET platform

[email protected] wrote:

> > Both Dave and Paul pointed out IronPython to me at the workshop and=20
> > how it could get Prothon a library and therefore a community much=20
> > faster than going it the hard way like you did.  There is a general=20
> > feeling going around that multiple language VM's are the "in-thing".
>=20
> (I presume Dave =3D> David Ascher?)

Yes.

> I'm not convinced that running after the "in-thing" always=20
> gets you to success fastest -- before you know it it's the=20
> "out-thing", or (more likely for .NET) others get there first=20
> and it just gets too crowded.

I didn't mean anything by that comment.  I know that and $1.50 will get =
you
a cup of coffee.

> I think that for people interested in building VMs, targeting=20
> multiple languages is a good thing.  But for people=20
> interested in designing languages, targeting a specific VM=20
> has the danger of locking you into that VM, and the=20
> limitations of a VM may blind you for possibilities in=20
> language design for which the VM doesn't have good support. =20
> I think that VM design should follow language design, not the=20
> other way around.  After all, languages are intended to give=20
> humans expressivity
> -- VMs are just an artifact needed to execute a language efficiently.

In an ideal world, yes, I could just design what I want and ignore such
distractions as .Net.  I am a pragmatist though, not an artist.

I'm not too concerned about my language getting off-track though.  My =
wild
ideas aren't in too much danger of getting polluted.  Even the massive =
.Net
is no match for my ability to find ways of turning something mainstream =
into
something offbeat.  Just wait and see.

> > I've got a kind of catch-22 that I'm worried about.  I have no one=20
> > helping me write libraries because they aren't using Prothon and no=20
> > one will use Prothon without libraries.  They got me thinking that=20
> > .Net would break the catch-22.
> >=20
> > Do you have any other ideas on how I could get a decent=20
> library in a=20
> > decent timeframe?
>=20
> Depends on what you want to have in your library.  I recall=20
> that Ruby in the early days re-used some Python code through=20
> a nearly mechanical translation (things like httplib IIRC). =20
> I guess that was possible because some low-level APIs (files,=20
> sockets) worked sufficiently similar.  That should work just=20
> as well for Prothon, probably even better given that it=20
> resembles Python even more than Ruby does.  Does Prothon have=20
> a decent foreign function interface?  (I'm convinced that the=20
> fact that Python's FFI is so simple helped a lot in getting a=20
> decent set of libraries quickly.)

Quickly is a relative term.  If I am doing it myself, even a powerful =
tool
will take quite a while.

> > .Net and Mono may not be the greatest solution in the=20
> world, but they=20
> > have a shot at running Prothon.  I looked into Parrot and=20
> CPython and=20
> > neither one could do the job.
>=20
> For Parrot, you must mean "not yet", right?

I checked out the Parrot project.  My confidence that they are going to
accomplish anything interesting in the next couple of years is quite =
low.
They gave papers two years ago promising lots of things and not one =
thing
they listed has been accomplished.

> > Just because I am not a good language designer does not=20
> mean I am not=20
> > a good project manager and programmer.  I would not enjoy=20
> working on=20
> > the fun parts of the VM knowing that some other path=20
> existed where the=20
> > language and community could grow faster.  I guess I'm=20
> finding out I'm=20
> > more motivated by Prothon's overall success than "programming fun".
>=20
> What is causing Prothon's overall sucess so far?  (This is an=20
> honest question, I really don't know.) =20

If Prothon has any "success" then it is just the bringing together of a =
very
talented group of people to define the language.  (Have you ever looked =
at
the last part of my talk?) I guess another measure of success might be =
the
level of respect Prothon has gotten considering it has nothing finished =
nor
anyone famous behind it.  Maybe what has caused this "success" has been =
my
non-ego-based approach and management style (or lack thereof).

I may be totally off-base here since I'm just guessing, but part of the
success may be the built-up pressure of people who have wanted Python =
3000
to happen and are tired of waiting.  The idea of a new Python certainly =
has
its appeal.

> Trust me, bringing a=20
> language to success requires a lot of luck (being at the=20
> right place at the right time), and a lot of patience=20
> (languages don't get popular overnight -- you just don't hear=20
> about most of them until they've arrived).

I know that.  The odds of Prothon having any sizable community is very =
low.

> > There will still be a lot of fun left.  IronProthon will still be=20
> > prototype based.  It's a long story but the CLR will be capable of=20
> > running my prototypes, the co-routines, and everything in Prothon=20
> > except light-weight threads, object locking, and the locking-based=20
> > features.
>=20
> That's cool.  I just hope that enough people will want to=20
> download the CLR just to be able to use Prothon, or that=20
> there are enough CLR users looking for a prototype-based=20
> variant on Python.

I'm in the process of playing down the Prototypes for the actual =
programmer.
I don't know how far you got in my talk but I've realized that classes =
are
going to be the main paradigm used in Prothon forever.  Other paradigms =
like
acquisition and maybe even aspects can be built on top of prototypes and =
I'm
convinced that Prototypes are the way a good flexible dynamic language
should be implemented, but they are just a tool for implementing object
paradigms, not a solution unto themselves.  The one-tier "classless" =
object
paradigm that the Self language pushes for using with prototypes is a =
joke.
It doesn't work.

> > > Hoping your website was hacked or it was practical joke
> >=20
> > The anti-.NET forces are just starting to appear now on the Prothon=20
> > mailing list.  It is starting to get interesting.  I can=20
> always change=20
> > my mind as I have many times in this project.  I'm kind of=20
> famous for=20
> > that.  Right now though the idea of having Prothon be=20
> something that=20
> > could be truly useful in a matter of months instead of=20
> years is very=20
> > attractive to me.
>=20
> I don't even see IronPython become truly useful that quickly,=20
> and it's way ahead of Prothon (it already has an=20
> implementation that runs on the CLR and it already has a huge=20
> set of potential applications that it will run, and a large=20
> user base interested in running them).

I implemented the full-featured Prothon interpreter equivalent of Python
(without libraries) in a few months.  I'm sure I can do the .Net Prothon =
in
a few months also.  Don't forget that I'm working 12 hrs a day 7 days a
week.  I'm not working in my spare time like Jim was.  I'll also be =
starting
with his code as a learning tool.  Also your definition of useful and =
mine
may be different. :-)

> > BTW: I hope my new website verbage isn't offensive to you.  In the=20
> > past I wasn't considering Prothon a successor to Python as I was=20
> > leaving that for Python 3000, but when you said that 3000=20
> was mostly=20
> > going to change range to an iter I had a change of heart.=20
> :-) Were you=20
> > serious about that?
>=20
> Hard to tell.  I'm not worried about Prothon overtaking=20
> Python any time soon, and in the year 3000 I hope something=20
> better will have been invented. :-)

I'm a lot older than you.  I'll be out of the picture even before 3000. =
:-)