On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 10:02 -0500, Sean Middleditch wrote: > You're missing one of the main arguments behind using C#/Java - that's > what's being taught in schools, that's what companies are looking for in > the coders they hire, and those are the languages people are *expecting* > to use. That is irrelevant to the discussion. There are gtk/gnome bindings for both C# and Java so that is a ficticious problem. I don't think the number of companies looking for coders that do this kinds of things in either .Net or Java is significant anyway, and toolkit bindings are what they mostly need. > And don't also forget how very unstable Python is in regards to > modules. A user upgrades Python (say, upgrades their OS?) and *poof* > half of everything stops working properly. You need a copy of every > module installed for every version of Python you have (because your apps > are generally made in a way that invokes a specific version of Python, > again to deal with broken module versioning). I didn't know python has that kind of problem. It is a PITA. At least during a major version life cicle it should respect ABI/API. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part