Python's biggest issue - distribution - solved without any containerization.
once this gets threads, TLS and a recent Python version, I can see it becoming a non-toy fast. well done!
once this gets threads, TLS and a recent Python version, I can see it becoming a non-toy fast. well done!
TLS will probably happen first -- Cosmopolitan already has mbedTLS for redbean, so a modified `_ssl.c` should get us most of the way there.
Recent Python versions ... what version is Python on right now? 3.10? (3.11 apparently) I picked 3.6 at the time because Cosmopolitan Libc did not have threads then (it does now, pthreads API is being filled as of this writing), and also because it wouldn't have too much churn. Perhaps after 3.11 gets stable I'll port it to use Cosmopolitan Libc.
Any problems still haunting pyinstaller and co. at this point will also show up for APEs, and solving them when you only have a lowest common denominator toolset at disposal will be harder.
I like APEs btw.
Like after I wrote this blog post, I wrote a small Python app using Flask/SQLite/D3.js, put everything in a single file, just copied it onto computers with Debian/Fedora/FreeBSD/Win10, and now I just access the info I need on those systems via the browser. Providing a browser GUI makes it easier for my colleagues as well, some of whom don't use terminals at all :)
For C extensions (where I've stubbed my toes quite a bit with PyInstaller), I think a nice goal with APE Python would be to have a website like Christoph Gohlke's (https://www.lfd.uci.edu/~gohlke/pythonlibs/), where you just select the packages you would like, and you download them compiled as a single-file executable you can use anywhere. This is an interesting problem, and there's been some work towards solving it, let's see if we can have an elegant solution.
Have you done a study?
This reminds me of when I've seen people say things like, "X is a showstopper for me when it comes to C++ [or whatever]", and someone responds, "That's not a problem in practice. People who write C++ don't care about X". And it's like, "Well, yeah, that's the nature of 'showstoppers'—all the people who do care about X noped out a long time ago." It's an intellectually dishonest way to justify choosing not to confront the X problem.
I think it's pretty much a unique feature of APE, because APE binaries modify their own code after the first run to nativize themselves. (Right? Or do the new versions work different?)
I can't tell if my disdain for this is real (Since I really like having my exes read-only and having a consistent hash) or just sublimated envy (Since most desktops will in practice have every file marked as read-write, and if it works it's not stupid)