merits of Lisp vs Python

[Brian Adkins]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

George Sakkis wrote:

JShrager@gmail. com wrote:
>

>1. Lisp is the only industrial strength language

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^
You keep using that phrase. I don't think it means what you think it
means.

[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means.

[John Nagle]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

Brian Adkins wrote:

George Sakkis wrote:
>

>JShrager@gmail. com wrote:
>>

>>1. Lisp is the only industrial strength language

Neither Lisp nor Python is an "industrial strength language".
The infrastructure is too weak. Hosting providers and distro
makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
Ask them.

John Nagle

[Brian Adkins]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

John Nagle wrote:

Neither Lisp nor Python is an "industrial strength language".
The infrastructure is too weak. Hosting providers and distro
makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
Ask them.
>
John Nagle

In your excitement to post a sweeping and inaccurate generalization (you
missed diss'ing Ruby), I think you may have missed the point of my post.
I surely wasn't trying to restart a dead thread, I just thought it was
funny that there was a similarity to a line from Princess Bride in the
thread (see relevant part below that you cut out).

If you want to restart a debate, please go back and reply to some
serious post in the thread - don't hijack mine for your own evil
purposes and cut out the good parts - did you even see the movie?

George Sakkis wrote:

You keep using that phrase. I don't think it means what you think it
means.

[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means.

[Ken Tilton]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python



Brian Adkins wrote:

John Nagle wrote:
>

> Neither Lisp nor Python is an "industrial strength language".
>The infrastructure is too weak. Hosting providers and distro
>makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
>care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
>Ask them.
>>
> John Nagle

>
>
In your excitement to post a sweeping and inaccurate generalization (you
missed diss'ing Ruby), I think you may have missed the point of my post.
I surely wasn't trying to restart a dead thread, I just thought it was
funny that there was a similarity to a line from Princess Bride in the
thread (see relevant part below that you cut out).
>
If you want to restart a debate, please go back and reply to some
serious post in the thread - don't hijack mine for your own evil
purposes and cut out the good parts - did you even see the movie?

Yes. I think George did, too. (I was wondering what you were up to.)

:)

kt

>
George Sakkis wrote:

You keep using that phrase. I don't think it means what you think it
means.

>
[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means.

--
Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and
I'm happy to state I finally won out over it.
-- Elwood P. Dowd

In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant.
-- Elwood's Mom

[John Nagle]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

Brian Adkins wrote:

John Nagle wrote:

If you want to restart a debate, please go back and reply to some
serious post in the thread - don't hijack mine for your own evil
purposes and cut out the good parts - did you even see the movie?

If you want to post jokes, try rec.humor.funny . Although
they mave moderation and you may not

John Nagle

[alex23]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

John Nagle wrote:

Hosting providers and distro
makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
Ask them.

Do you have any real experience with recent linux distros? Or with any
_real_ hosting providers?

Because what you've said is clearly not true. Just because the
situation isn't as easy _for you_ as you would like, doesn't mean that
Python is being ignored to the extent you're trying to claim.

-alex23

[Paul Rubin]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

"alex23" <wuwei23@gmail. comwrites:

Hosting providers and distro
makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
Ask them.

>
Do you have any real experience with recent linux distros? Or with any
_real_ hosting providers?

Care to name a "real" hosting provider that cares whether Python works?

[Brian Adkins]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

alex23 wrote:

John Nagle wrote:

>Hosting providers and distro
>makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
>care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
>Ask them.

>
Do you have any real experience with recent linux distros? Or with any
_real_ hosting providers?
>
Because what you've said is clearly not true. Just because the
situation isn't as easy _for you_ as you would like, doesn't mean that
Python is being ignored to the extent you're trying to claim.
>
-alex23
>

alex23 - please don't feed the trolls.

[John Nagle]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

Brian Adkins wrote:

alex23 wrote:
>

>John Nagle wrote:
>>

>>Hosting providers and distro
>>makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
>>care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
>>Ask them.

>>
>>
>Do you have any real experience with recent linux distros? Or with any
>_real_ hosting providers?

Do you? You're writing from a gmail account, not your own site.

I have four hosting accounts with EZpublishing and a dedicated server
at Aplus.net. I spent weeks trying to find a hosting provider that
would provide a Python environment that "just works", like everyone
does for Perl. What you typically get is a basic Python 2.4,
and a refusal to install more packages, because it's so time-consuming.
Or a quote of $50 to $150 per hour to install Python packages.

There are a very few hosting providers that actually want to provide
Python hosting, such as Hard Hat Hosting. But most don't.

>>
>Because what you've said is clearly not true. Just because the
>situation isn't as easy _for you_ as you would like, doesn't mean that
>Python is being ignored to the extent you're trying to claim.

I don't see any evidence to back up this unsubstantiated claim.

John Nagle

[Brian Adkins]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

John Nagle wrote:

Brian Adkins wrote:

>alex23 wrote:
>>

>>John Nagle wrote:
>>>
>>>Hosting providers and distro
>>>makers aren't concerned over whether Python works. They
>>>care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
>>>Ask them.
>>>
>>>
>>Do you have any real experience with recent linux distros? Or with any
>>_real_ hosting providers?

>
Do you? You're writing from a gmail account, not your own site.
>
I have four hosting accounts with EZpublishing and a dedicated server
at Aplus.net. I spent weeks trying to find a hosting provider that
would provide a Python environment that "just works", like everyone
does for Perl. What you typically get is a basic Python 2.4,
and a refusal to install more packages, because it's so time-consuming.
Or a quote of $50 to $150 per hour to install Python packages.
>
There are a very few hosting providers that actually want to provide
Python hosting, such as Hard Hat Hosting. But most don't.

>>>
>>Because what you've said is clearly not true. Just because the
>>situation isn't as easy _for you_ as you would like, doesn't mean that
>>Python is being ignored to the extent you're trying to claim.

>
I don't see any evidence to back up this unsubstantiated claim.
>
John Nagle

Ok, since you provided some details you appear less troll-like, so I'll
ignore my own advice.

With prices of dedicated servers and virtual private servers so cheap,
why would anyone get a hosting account without root access? Once you
have root, just install whatever you want. It shouldn't take more than a
few minutes to install Python or whatever language you desire.

If "apt-get install" doesn't give you a recent enough version, just
download the source and compile it.

Brian

P.S. very cool rag doll physics by the way...

[Paul Rubin]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

Brian Adkins <lojicdotcomNOS PAM@gmail.comwr ites:

With prices of dedicated servers and virtual private servers so cheap,
why would anyone get a hosting account without root access?

Because it turns you into a sysadmin instead of letting specialists
handle all the OS stuff so you can concentrate on your application.

Also, no VPS where you have to run your own httpd instance (and
usually your own database if you're using one) can possibly be as
cheap as a virtual host where you're sharing the same httpd with
thousands of other sites.

[Brian Adkins]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

Paul Rubin wrote:

Brian Adkins <lojicdotcomNOS PAM@gmail.comwr ites:

>With prices of dedicated servers and virtual private servers so cheap,
>why would anyone get a hosting account without root access?

>
Because it turns you into a sysadmin instead of letting specialists
handle all the OS stuff so you can concentrate on your application.

I'm not sure what "OS stuff" you're referring to, but my interactions
with my dedicated host are quite similar to when I had a shared hosting
account (except I never have to contact the hosting company like I used
to with a shared account - it just keeps humming along).

Besides, this whole thing got started with John resurrecting the
"industrial strength" argument. I hardly think a shared hosting account
would be considered "industrial strength". If you're not willing to deal
with a dedicated server, then I don't think you're serious about
"industrial strength", right? Not to mention the fact that none of this
has anything to do with the "industrial strengthness" of the language.

>
Also, no VPS where you have to run your own httpd instance (and
usually your own database if you're using one) can possibly be as
cheap as a virtual host where you're sharing the same httpd with
thousands of other sites.

And you *want* to share the same httpd with thousands of other sites?

I can relate to what you're saying. I tried the shared hosting thing
originally, but the saying, "you get what you pay for" holds some truth
here.

Maybe y'all should change the thread to "Why don't shared hosting
companies treat Python customers better?" or something along those
lines. We seem to have drifted from "Princess Bride" quotes and the
merits of Lisp vs. Python ;)

[John Nagle]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

Paul Rubin wrote:

Brian Adkins <lojicdotcomNOS PAM@gmail.comwr ites:
>

>>With prices of dedicated servers and virtual private servers so cheap,
>>why would anyone get a hosting account without root access?

>
Because it turns you into a sysadmin instead of letting specialists
handle all the OS stuff so you can concentrate on your application.

Exactly. I want to outsource these headaches to someone who's
doing it for a thousand servers and has a standardized "just works"
configuration that's Python-friendly. It's inefficient to work
through all these issues for a single server. I have better things
to do with my time.

When starting out with this project, I'd made the assumption that
Python was a stable, working, well-supported technology, like Perl
hosting. It isn't.

It's really amazing how stable Perl hosting is. I have a site,
"downside.c om", that's been running a Perl application since 2000,
with essentially no attention since 2002. It's been migrated to new
servers twice by the hosting provider, without my having had to change
anything. Or even do anything. It's talking to a MySQL database,
going out and retrieving files from the SEC, parsing complex documents,
gettting a feed from NASDAQ, responding to queries, and doing
quite a bit of work. When developing that, I had no serious problems with Perl.

Python, on the other hand, is uphill all the way. Constant trouble
with version issues, especially with C components called from Python.
MySQLdb, M2Crypto, SSL - they all have platform/version
incompatibility problems. I just spent three days making M2Crypto
work on a new Linux server with a different Red Hat version.
Neither Python's packaging tools nor the platform's packaging
tools deal adequately with these issues.

The language is fine. It's those weakly-supported packages out
there in the cold that are the problem. (I definitely agree with
Guido that SWIG is a bad idea. I've been combing through the 24,000
lines of C generated by SWIG for M2Crypto, figuring out the compile
errors and what caused them. This is neither fun nor desirable.)

I get the feeling that Python isn't used much for general web hosting
any more. Only about two messages per month on this newsgroup mention
a hosting-related issue.

One wonders how many people try and give up.

John Nagle

[Brian Adkins]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python

John Nagle wrote:

Paul Rubin wrote:

>Brian Adkins <lojicdotcomNOS PAM@gmail.comwr ites:
>>

>>With prices of dedicated servers and virtual private servers so cheap,
>>why would anyone get a hosting account without root access?

>>
>Because it turns you into a sysadmin instead of letting specialists
>handle all the OS stuff so you can concentrate on your application.

>
Exactly. I want to outsource these headaches to someone who's
doing it for a thousand servers and has a standardized "just works"
configuration that's Python-friendly. It's inefficient to work
through all these issues for a single server. I have better things
to do with my time.
>
When starting out with this project, I'd made the assumption that
Python was a stable, working, well-supported technology, like Perl
hosting. It isn't.
>
It's really amazing how stable Perl hosting is. I have a site,
"downside.c om", that's been running a Perl application since 2000,
with essentially no attention since 2002. It's been migrated to new
servers twice by the hosting provider, without my having had to change
anything. Or even do anything. It's talking to a MySQL database,
going out and retrieving files from the SEC, parsing complex documents,
gettting a feed from NASDAQ, responding to queries, and doing
quite a bit of work. When developing that, I had no serious problems
with Perl.

This may sound like I'm baiting you, but it's a sincere question. If
your experience with Perl was so good, why did you decide to pursue
Python? Trouble free hosting and no problems in development - sounds
like it worked out well for you.

I do think that "hosting for the masses" is geared toward PHP, Perl,
..NET, etc.

I primarily develop in Ruby on Rails (I'm here 'cause the original
thread was posted to c.l.p and c.l.l) and I admit that trying that in a
shared hosting environment will probably lead to frustration, but once I
bit the bullet and got a VPS, and later a dedicated server, it was
smooth sailing, and the performance is *so* much better.

A bit of a learning curve getting Apache, Mongrel, MySQL, etc. up and
running (which was a fixed amount of time), then it just runs. In my
case, the productivity gains over my previous environment
(Java/Spring/Hibernate) was enough to justify a little pain for long
term gains. Switching from the VPS to the dedicated server with a
different company was easy because I already had the recipe to get a
server setup.

>
Python, on the other hand, is uphill all the way. Constant trouble
with version issues, especially with C components called from Python.
MySQLdb, M2Crypto, SSL - they all have platform/version
incompatibility problems. I just spent three days making M2Crypto
work on a new Linux server with a different Red Hat version.
Neither Python's packaging tools nor the platform's packaging
tools deal adequately with these issues.

Now I understand your original post a bit better. Sounds like you've had
a fair amount of frustration.

The language is fine. It's those weakly-supported packages out
there in the cold that are the problem. (I definitely agree with
Guido that SWIG is a bad idea. I've been combing through the 24,000
lines of C generated by SWIG for M2Crypto, figuring out the compile
errors and what caused them. This is neither fun nor desirable.)
>
I get the feeling that Python isn't used much for general web hosting
any more. Only about two messages per month on this newsgroup mention
a hosting-related issue.

It could be that the web folks are concentrated elsewhere - maybe a
TurboGears or Django forum? Are you just using Python with CGI, or with
a web framework? If the latter, I expect the framework folks could be
quite helpful.

>
One wonders how many people try and give up.
>
John Nagle

[Ken Tilton]

Re: merits of Lisp vs Python



John Nagle wrote:

Brian Adkins wrote:
>

>John Nagle wrote:

>
>

>If you want to restart a debate, please go back and reply to some
>serious post in the thread - don't hijack mine for your own evil
>purposes and cut out the good parts - did you even see the movie?

>
>
If you want to post jokes...

fer chrissakes, it was the OP of "means what you think it means" who was
obviously doing Princess Bride and being reasonably funny, Brian just
missed that it was deliberate.

, try ...

.....comp.lang. lisp. All the SBCL bug reports are starting to drag down
the mood of this NG.

kt

--
Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and
I'm happy to state I finally won out over it.
-- Elwood P. Dowd

In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant.
-- Elwood's Mom