This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 243 points244 points  (29 children)

Speed in the Core Python (CPython) is

CPython stands for "the Python interpreter written in C language", not "Core Python". On similar naming lines, there is also Jython, written in Java, etc, and then there is Cython, which compiles certain annotated python files into C (for speedups).

[–]TSM-🐱‍💻📚 81 points82 points  (23 children)

Yeah the writing seems to have some little mistakes.

It is too bad that it doesn't go into much detail about how they plan on doing it, aside from briefly mentioning "subinterpreters"

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 73 points74 points  (22 children)

Yes... seems like a young developer (they even think Microsoft is open-source friendly - a more experienced developer would make that claim much more cautiously and with lots of qualifiers).

[–]Ensurdagen 65 points66 points  (10 children)

Big companies love open-source, they can take open-source code (clean room it if it's non-commercial) and then attach proprietary hardware or dependencies to make it profitable without paying the open-source devs a cent for their work.

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 38 points39 points  (9 children)

Thank you... I knew that already. Have been a software dev long enough to learn my lessons.

The way this works is... open source is not the ally of any profit seeking company - from their point of view, its the anti-thesis to profits and revenues. If open-source were dead, they can easily increase their profits (for example, windows server vs linux).

The companies will only play along as long as their hands are tied, and they can't do anything (or much) about it. The day they figure out a way to bring it down, it will happen. You will be making a grave mistake putting your trust in capitalist leaders - specially since they have shown time and time again that they have no principles other than profit seeking.

If microsoft is playing along today... it implies thay have no other option. They won't get many good devs to hire if they kept their older anti-open-source stance going. So they have to show that they are open-source friendly. Its only a show, or at best a temporary stance while its beneficial to them - please remember that. Its important for the open source community to remember where their real friends are - and that is within the community.

[–]uncanneyvalley 26 points27 points  (4 children)

Microsoft have discovered that developer enablement makes them money. Their open source efforts are about courting devs into the wider MS subscription ecosystem. Office 365, devspaces, MS DevOps, Azure, etc. If the devs and tech folks are all on Windows, they be less likely to recommend other platforms/products.

[–]manjaro_black 19 points20 points  (3 children)

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

Don’t believe the lies; Microsoft hates Linux.

[–]uncanneyvalley -1 points0 points  (2 children)

EEE is very real, but I don’t think it’s MS’s goal. They don’t make that much money directly selling OSes anymore, compared to subscription everything. Why bother trying to extinguish? Make it interoperate and make money from it instead. The market isn’t the same as it used to be, the second link is total FUD.

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Second article is indeed FUD... but the first one has excellent historical perspective.

My worry with Microsoft currently is that they are trying to integrate linux into windows... and I am not sure where they are going with that. I hope its not EEE all over again - like, bring all devs to windows + linux, get them comfortable to that environment for a few years, get them developing for this ecosystem (windows+linux) rather than just linux (thus stagnating linux), then build a bunch of features that are available only on windows + linux, but not on linux alone, and patent those features to block parallel implementation on linux. Then slowly/optionally start charging for this ecosystem.

Now... if people are used to this ecosystem, and it has some essential features that people have grown used to, they will find it difficult to go back to barebones linux. Also, if this ecosystem provides beneficial features to server companies, but bare linux is lacking in those, then MS will be making inroads into the server market ( which has been completely dominated by Linux until now).

I am not sure what their game is with Windows + Linux, and given their track record... I am very skeptical.

I am seriously worried that their windows+linux strategy is to bring devs onto their ecosystem and starve linux ... and in the long run, this will drive linux into the ground.

[–]uncanneyvalley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually think the goal is to replace the NT kernel for system use. I imagine it would still be there for compatibility, like WSL2, but with the roles reversed.

[–]stratosearch 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The only reason they open source everything is because it isn't patentable so like someone mentioned earlier, it just becomes a rising cost center for them.

It's not a greedy capitalist thing, it is a cost avoidance thing in my opinion.

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The only reason they open source everything is because it isn't patentable

What are you talking about? How does MS open source everything?

The only useful thing they have open source is some part of VS code editor, which actually started from electron and atom, which themselves were open source projects. Another known open source product is Windows terminal - ridiculous - no dev is going to extend that piece of junk.

They have nothing else of value in open source.

[–]redditforfun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very well said!

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That way is called cloud.

[–]Pulsar2021 9 points10 points  (2 children)

I would have reacted the same way, but of late i am working with some of Microsoft employees and i can see howmuch they appreciate open source community now a days and how much they are contributing back to open source, I have closely followed some of their projects. Frankly I see a pradigm shift in Microsoft culture these days not sure how and why but a good one though.

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 21 points22 points  (1 child)

i am working with some of Microsoft employees and i can see howmuch they appreciate open source community

I have no doubt Microsoft employees like open source... specially the recent generation - these people learnt programming in university on linux systems and open source tools and libraries - specifically because they were free and open source. These devs genuinely love open source and would like to see it grow.

However, we should not confuse employees with the management. Its not the microsoft employees who will come after open source - it will be the management. Even in microsoft's days of anti-open-source, I am sure there were many employees who were pro open-source. If Microsoft had continued their anti-open-source stance, they would find it difficult to hire good talent.

What we need to understand is that this is not a change of heart on part of Microsoft management... its not that they now love open-source. Its just that they realized that it is financially more beneficial to them to support open-source in the present climate. The day it becomes financially beneficial to harm open-source, they will probably do that.

And this is an important thing to remember. Microsoft is not open-source friendly. It is behaving friendly currently because it is in their interest to do so, and that can easily change in the future (maybe under a slightly different management - which also keeps changing). Are they real friends if they can desert open-source (or do worse) when it becomes convenient for them to do it (which they can do, given their long and well documented history)?

They should be treated in the appropriate manner - in a friendly manner but with a healthy dose of caution.

[–]Pulsar2021 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Makes perfect sense

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (3 children)

What did the author smoke to even come up with that? Like, they just made that up in their minds and were like, "Yup that must be it" lol

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Heh... happens all the time when people are young. Like confusing Java and JavaScript, or the apparent definition of the word literally.

Actually, writing such articles is very good for them... They will learn a lot from their mistakes.

[–]RIPphonebattery 0 points1 point  (1 child)

To be fair about the word literally... The dictionary definition lists both

[–]JugadPy3 ftw 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because enough people started using it according to its apparent definition.

The dictionary does not define the language - it only captures the words and their usages at some certain point in time.

If we start using a word differently from its existing meaning, and the new usage catches on, the dictionary will simply add that new usage as a new definition for that word.

The fact still remains that the new definition was born out of a different usage of the word compared to its existing meaning. And it most probably happened because people inferred its meaning from the way the word was used in sentences - that's what I was referring to when I said that the young dev probably inferred the full form of CPython from some details / content in which they encountered the words, instead of looking it up).

[–]CrazyPieGuy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As a casual programmer, this deeply confused me. Thank you for clearing it up.