[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Python?

["Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Vasco Alexandre Da Silva Costa [mailto:vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone ever been interested in making the Freeciv code OO, i.e.
> > migrating away from C by gradual, hodgepodge methods?
>
> [snip failed C++ OO story of woe]

I would submit that OO has many possible pitfalls, and these have to be
mastered before OO is of real use.  For instance, the pitfall of useless
refactoring.  You only want to refactor things that you *know you need
now*.  Don't waste time refactoring for abstract, perceived future
benefits.  Most of those benefits will never materialize, because you'll
take too long doing your project and then your project will be cancelled
somehow.  Not enough time, energy, money, or morale to continue with it.

There are 2 kinds of C developers:
- those that don't know OO methodologies
- those that do, but are using C on a particular legacy project

Python of course sounds much better to the latter than the former.  I
agree that C++ sucks, make no mistake.  The problem is, for a lot of
problem domains C also sucks.  It is merely a portable assembler.

> I spent precious time with this useless effort when I could have been
> adding *features* which is what users really want.

The question is, do you find all of your features easy to code in C?  If
so, there's no reason for you to change what you're doing.  Your
language is fitting your problem domain.

On the other hand, do you find that implementing certain features in C
is a real chore?  Do you hate the amount of time and pain it takes for
you to accomplish certain things?  Do you avoid certain things because
you *have* been there, done that, and you know that C isn't going to get
you anywhere?  If you find yourself running into these sorts of issues,
it is appropriate to use a language more suited to your problem domain.
Something higher level than a portable assembler.

Speaking for me personally, C only makes me happy when I'm preparing to
implement standalone ASM files.  I don't need it for inline ASM, only
for standalone ASM.  C has easier calling semantics than C++ if you're
going to write a function entirely in ASM.  I always write a C version
of the function before writing the ASM version, so that I have a "known
good" to compare it to.

C++ makes me happy when I need high performance, am not ready to drop to
ASM yet, and can keep the design very simple.  The minute the design
gets complicated, I start to hate C++.  In the future I'll be happy to
do as little C++ code as possible.

> C is simple, portable and it works. C++ is complex, less portable.
> Java leads to ugly code and is slow, Python is even slower.

But Python does not lead to ugly code and is fast to implement.  The
tradeoff is developer time vs. program execution time.  For most things,
I know where my priorities are!

I mean look, for instance, I've submitted a bug about the server dying
because the map reveal takes too long.  C doesn't automagically save you
from performance nightmares.  You have to use your brain and design
well, or at least use your profiler if you're opposed to using your
brain.  :-)

> C# actually would be ok if it could be compiled to binary
> format, didn't
> require a huge runtime to do anything, wasn't designed by MicroSoft.

Being designed by Microsoft is not a problem.  Being beholden to
Microsoft is.  There are standards efforts; some have been completed,
others are underway.  I'm unclear about the details.  I don't yet care
because I'm a Windows developer.

> We need better graphics, sound, higher level features with sane code.
> We do not need to get stuck into a language porting morass.

The question is whether Python OO-ification actually makes better
graphics, sound, and higher level features easier.  I doubt it can make
the creation of Art and Audio assets easier.  I think you need artists,
musicians, tools, and standard file formats for that.  But certainly
it's a good choice for higher level features, being a higher level
language with built-in list and hash table types, etc.

I haven't perused the Freeciv codebase, actually.  My experience looking
at the Xconq codebase is there's no way in hell I'm touching that stuff
"as is."  Wondering about which of the 400 functions I need to implement
to get an AI or a new GUI going, no thanks!  I've talked to some of
their mailing list lurkers, and some have said, "Yeah, if only we had
Python or something like that, we'd actually contribute something."
Most people in 2003 do not like C for application development.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.