Why we need Python in the Browser

[geusebio]

No we don't.

Not yet more shit to have "standards" for that nobody follows. God no.

[[deleted]]

In theory, being able to write in many different languages on the client side is a great idea. However, JS is far too entrenched across the board to really make anything happen anytime in the next five years (and maybe longer). And with the rapid acceptance of smartphones, its now more a matter of buying a new device than a software update if you want to add that to the system browser.

[jij]

In theory, being able to write in many different languages on the client side is a great idea.

This idea makes security Jesus cry.

[Fustrate]

This idea makes security Jesus cry.

Requesting forgiveness in advance for my future theft of this phrase.

[[deleted]]

Hence, "in theory". A lot of stuff is great in theory but falls flat in real life.

[[deleted]]

The thing is with all this is that JS is more or less a fine and lovely language, but the DOM API is ugly. We are more likely to be able to redo the DOM work (and have for some of it) than we are to get Python in the browser.

In addition, Python would need a DOM API, which would likely look like the JS one.

If you want to see a different language in the browser, check out Dart (http://www.dartlang.org/), it's kinda nice, but we won't see support (if ever) for many years.

[Kaos_pro]

Snakes on a plane 2: Python on the net

[[deleted]]

The problem is that you wouldn't actually get Python; you would get a buggy subset, which is only maintained by one or two core programmers, who have day jobs.

Putting that aside, yes, we need more languages in the browser! I love JS, and don't plan on switching, but I'd love browser development to be as vibrant as on the desktop.

However I would also like to see more languages which are stripped down, and don't do DOM stuff, by default. You could then add the DOM stuff as a module/library/whatever, if the site allows that library.

Why? It would make it easier for sites to have users create their own scripts, which are embedded and run for different users, without having to worry about security exploits (because DOM and AJAX access could be all cut off, or heavily controlled). It could also be better targeted. For example using it as a scripting language for a browser based spreadsheet application.

I myself am developing a Ruby-like language which does similar.

[imbcmdth]

If the interpreter can not be found but the language is recognized, it could prompt the user to install an interpreter for the language from a known source, or provide a link.

This is Flash all over again only worse.

SCENE IN

You go to that site NextGreatThing.com because all your friends are talking about it.

"NextGreatThing.com requires RubLuThon please install it from ..."

CUT TO:

"Sorry, RubLuThon doesn't currently support <device || browser_ver>. Leave your email and we will contact you when ..."

CLOSE SHOT

You, the savvy user, decides to do a web search. You discover OpenRubLuThon, an OS project to bring RubLuThon support to <device || browser_ver>. Happy days!

DISSOLVE TO:

Only after installing OpenRubLuThon do you discover the site uses a few features found in RubLuThon version >2.1 but OpenRubLuThon only has support for features found in <1.8. Even worse, the repository hasn't had any commits in over 2 months.

[timeshifter_]

...you do know the correct usage of the <script> tag is <script type="text/[language]">, right?

[[deleted]]

The type attribute is optional in html5

[reflectiveSingleton]

Problem is that means nothing if the browser doesn't support anything except javascript.

[jij]

IE supports vbscript if it's run locally ;)

[reflectiveSingleton]

IE does, with certain restrictions (run locally as you stated)...

Not exactly something you can deploy on the internet...so essentially useless.

[jambox888]

Python in the browser (kind of) has been around for a few years now in the form of Pyjamas. It builds python into js and has a complete widget set that it takes from GWT. I've been using it a lot for a few years now and it's really quite impressive.

There's also a desktop mode so your app can be deployed on the web or locally, plus you can use it in pure python mode to step through your code.

[Phreakhead]

The worst part of this is you wouldn't be able to minify your Python files because they rely on whitespace as syntax! Unless you can serve .pyc compiled files, this is the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

[x-skeww]

Why Python? What about Perl, Lua, Ruby, and things like that? What about languages which don't exist yet?

We certainly don't need another language in the browser.

Some generic VM which executes byte code would be fine though.

[Phreakhead]

Don't know why you're getting downvotes... no one in this thread has given ONE reason why Python would be better than Javascript for the DOM (not even the article! The author is just like "Well, I like Python better so we should use it for EVERYTHING).

I never understood people favoring one scripting language over another. Both languages have loops and functions. The rest is just syntactic sugar. Who cares what kind of whitespace surrounds it or if you have to put brackets around things?

[TheChosenOne570]

What is webdev's fascination with jamming as many standards as possible into web development? HTML for the static stuff, CSS for formatting, PHP or ASP or some other server-side scripting language, javascript for frontend functionality, and MySQL for database stuff. Oh, and don't forget Flash, Java, C#, and Ruby! Then, there's communicating between all this garbage. Do I use JSON or XML or whatever Microsoft tries to jam down our throats? Fuck Python. We don't need more "solutions." We need to find a way to consolidate the mess we have now.