I recently started learning Python. Not yet ventured into coding.
During one of my learning sessions, i came accross the term Jython.
I googled it & got some information.
I would like to know if anyone has implemented any real-world program using Jython.
Most of the time, Jython isn't used directly to write full read-world programs, but a lot of programs actually embed Jython to use it as a scripting language.
The official Jython website gives a list of projects, some written in Jython, others using Jython for scripting:
http://wiki.python.org/jython/JythonUsers
I am writing a full application in Jython at the moment, and would highly recommend it. Having all of the Java libraries at your disposal is very handy, and the Python syntax and language features actually make using some of them easier than it is in Java (I'm mostly talking about Swing here).
Check out the chapter on GUI Applications from the Jython book. It does a lot of comparisons like 'Look at all this Java code, and now look at it reduced to Python code of half the length!'.
The only caveats I've found are:
Jython development tends to run slightly behind Python, which can be annoying if you find a cool way of doing something in Python, only to discover it's not supported in the current Jython version.
Occasionally you might have hiccups with the interface between Python and Java (I have a couple of unsolved problems here and here, although there are always workarounds for this kind of thing).
Distribution is not as simple as it could be, although once you figure out how to do it, it's fairly painless. I recommend following the method here. It essentially consists of:
Exploding jython.jar and adding your own modules into it.
Writing and compiling a small Java class that creates a Python interpreter and loads up your Python modules.
Creating an executable .jar file consisting of the jython.jar modules, your own Python modules, and the Java class.
Jython really shines for dependency injection.
You know those pesky variables you have to give your program, like
file system paths
server names
ports
Jython provides a really nice way of injecting those variables by putting them in a script. It works equally well for injecting java dependencies, as well.
WebSphere and WebLogic use it as their default scripting engine for administrative purposes.
A lot of other Oracle products ship it as part of their "oracle_commons" module (Oracle Universal Installer, Oracle HTTP Server etc). It's mostly version 2.2 being deployed though, which is a bit old and clunky.
There is a list of application that uses jython at http://wiki.python.org/jython/JythonUsers
Related
Can Jython help here? Should I run Grails above Jython and if yes, how? Somehow I should be able to run Grails and Python script on same JVM. There are other possibilities like making REST service for Python script or some interprocess communication but lets not deal with those for now.
Jython is a JSR223 scripting language, so you should be able to follow the usual methods. (http://www.jython.org/archive/22/userguide.html#embedding-jython)
ScriptEngine engine = new ScriptEngineManager().getEngineByName("python")
engine.eval("x = 2 + 2")
It might be a non-trivial thing to get your Jython and any libraries you want to use organized on your server, but if all you need is the language and the standard libraries, you should be able to just add it as a dependency in your buildfile - it is on Maven Central (compile 'org.python:jython:2.7.1b3').
But keep in mind that many python libraries (i.e. ones that use compiled C-code) are not going to work with Jython.
So, you might need to instead use a native python installation and call it as a process (using ProcessBuilder, for example). Groovy has some nice sugar for doing this sort of thing with strings.
Process process = "python mypython.py".execute()
An internet search for things like "groovy execute shell command" will yield lots of examples. Depending on your deployment scenario, this could be tricky to set up and maintain.
Is it possible to deploy python applications such that you don't release the source code and you don't have to be sure the customer has python installed?
I'm thinking maybe there is some installation process that can run a python app from just the .pyc files and a shared library containing the interpreter or something like that?
Basically I'm keen to get the development benefits of a language like Python - high productivity etc. but can't quite see how you could deploy it professionally to a customer where you don't know how there machine is set up and you definitely can't deliver the source.
How do professional software houses developing in python do it (or maybe the answer is that they don't) ?
You protect your source code legally, not technologically. Distributing py files really isn't a big deal. The only technological solution here is not to ship your program (which is really becoming more popular these days, as software is provided over the internet rather than fully installed locally more often.)
If you don't want the user to have to have Python installed but want to run Python programs, you'll have to bundle Python. Your resistance to doing so seems quite odd to me. Java programs have to either bundle or anticipate the JVM's presence. C programs have to either bundle or anticipate libc's presence (usually the latter), etc. There's nothing hacky about using what you need.
Professional Python desktop software bundles Python, either through something like py2exe/cx_Freeze/some in-house thing that does the same thing or through embedding Python (in which case Python comes along as a library rather than an executable). The former approach is usually a lot more powerful and robust.
Yes, it is possible to make installation packages. Look for py2exe, cx_freeze and others.
No, it is not possible to keep the source code completely safe. There are always ways to decompile.
Original source code can trivially be obtained from .pyc files if someone wants to do it. Code obfuscation would make it more difficult to do something with the code.
I am surprised no one mentioned this before now, but Cython seems like a viable solution to this problem. It will take your Python code and transpile it into CPython compatible C code. You also get a small speed boost (~25% last I checked) since it will be compiled to native machine code instead of just Python byte code. You still need to be sure the user has Python installed (either by making it a pre-requisite pushed off onto the user to deal with, or bundling it as part of the installer process). Also, you do need to have at least one small part of your application in pure Python: the hook into the main function.
So you would need something basic like this:
import cython_compiled_module
if __name__ == '__main__':
cython_compiled_module.main()
But this effectively leaks no implementation details. I think using Cython should meet the criteria in the question, but it also introduces the added complexity of compiling in C, which loses some of Python's easy cross-platform nature. Whether that is worth it or not is up to you.
As others stated, even the resulting compiled C code could be decompiled with a little effort, but it is likely much more close to the type of obfuscation you were initially hoping for.
Well, it depends what you want to do. If by "not releasing the source code" you mean "the customer should not be able to access the source code in any way", well, you're fighting a losing battle. Even programs written in C can be reverse engineered, after all. If you're afraid someone will steal from you, make them sign a contract and sue them if there's trouble.
But if you mean "the customer should not care about python files, and not be able to casually access them", you can use a solution like cx_Freeze to turn your Python application into an executable.
Build a web application in python. Then the world can use it via a browser with zero install.
I've built a fairly complicated application with PyQt4 and Python, but it is a pain to send to people (and once I do, they have no idea how to run it). Then there are dependencies to wrestle. Ugh.
Anyways, I just learned about Jython, and since virtually everybody has Java installed, it seems like a perfect solution to my problem of distribution of Python scripts. Has anybody actually developed a functional piece of software with Jython, and if it even exists, one with Jambi bindings?
I'm just asking so that I don't go digging for something which doesn't work.
Thanks!
If you did move this application to Jython, you would have to convert the GUI from QT to Jambi.
Jython is the Python language implemented in Java to run on the Java virtual machine. Because it runs on the JVM, Jython apps can use any Java libraries, such as SWING or Jambi.
It is possible that the differences between PyQT and Jambi are very small, but fundamentally, you would not be using QT directly. Instead you would be using Jambi. And if you use any non-standard Python modules you will still have to resolve packaging issues.
If your application uses other Python modules which are implemented in C, then you would also need to replace those with Java libraries. Jython is great at running a lot of pure Python code unchanged, but Jython runs in a Java environment and there are differences in the way some fundamental objects, such as strings, are implemented. Jython uses Java internals, Java's garbage collector, and so on.
There is more info available via this SO question: Migrating from CPython to Jython
I just downloaded the original Python interpreter from Python's site. I just want to learn this language but to start with, I want to write Windows-based standalone applications that are powered by any RDBMS. I want to bundle it like any typical Windows setup.
I searched old posts on SO and found guys suggesting wxPython and py2exe. Apart from that few suggested IronPython since it is powered by .NET.
I want to know whether IronPython is a pure variant of Python or a modified variant. Secondly, what is the actual use of Python? Is it for PHP like thing or like C# (you can either program Windows-based app. or Web.).
IronPython isn't a variant of Python, it is Python. It's an implementation of the Python language based on the .NET framework. So, yes, it is pure Python.
IronPython is caught up to CPython (the implementation you're probably used to) 2.6, so some of the features/changes seen in Python 2.7 or 3.x will not be present in IronPython. Also, the standard library is a bit different (but what you lose is replaced by all that .NET has to offer).
The primary application of IronPython is to script .NET applications written in C# etc., but it can also be used as a standalone. IronPython can also be used to write web applications using the SilverLight framework.
If you need access to .NET features, use IronPython. If you're just trying to make a Windows executable, use py2exe.
Update
For writing basic RDBMS apps, just use CPython (original Python), it's more extensible and faster. Then, you can use a number of tools to make it stand alone on a Windows PC. For now, though, just worry about learning Python (those skills will mostly carry over to IronPython if you choose to switch) and writing your application.
IronPython is an independent Python implementation written in C# as opposed to the original implementation, often referred to as CPython due to it being written in (no surprise) C.
Python is multi-purpose - you can use it to write web apps (often using a framework such as Django or Pylons), GUI apps (as you've mentioned), command-line tools and as a scripting language embedded inside an app written in another language (for instance, the 3D modelling tool Blender can be scripted using Python).
what does "Pure Python" mean? If you're talking about implemented in Python in the same sense that a module may be pure python, then no, and no Python implementation is. If you mean "Compatible with cPython" then yes, code written to cPython will work in IronPython, with a few caveats. The one that's likely to matter most is that the libraries are different, for instance code depending on ctypes or Tkinter won't work. Another difference is that IronPython lags behind cPython by a bit. the very latest version of this writing is 2.6.1, with an Alpha version supporting a few of the 2.7 language features available too.
What do you really need? If you want to learn to program with python, and also want to produce code for windows, you can use IronPython for that, but you can also use cPython and py2exe; both will work equally well for this with only differences in the libraries.
IronPython is an implementation of Python using C#. It's just like the implementation of Python using Java by Jython. You might want to note that IronPython and Jython will always lag behind a little bit in development. However, you do get the benefit of having some libraries that's not available in the standard Python libraries. In IronPython, you will be able to get access to some of the .NET stuff, like System.Drawings and such, though by using these non-standard libraries, it will be harder to port your code to other platforms. For example, you will have to install mono to run apps written in IronPython on Linux (On windows you will need the .NET Framework)
I've got some experience with Bash, which I don't mind, but now that I'm doing a lot of Windows development I'm needing to do basic stuff/write basic scripts using
the Windows command-line language. For some reason said language really irritates me, so I was considering learning Python and using that instead.
Is Python suitable for such things? Moving files around, creating scripts to do things like unzipping a backup and restoring a SQL database, etc.
Python is well suited for these tasks, and I would guess much easier to develop in and debug than Windows batch files.
The question is, I think, how easy and painless it is to ensure that all the computers that you have to run these scripts on, have Python installed.
Summary
Windows: no need to think, use Python.
Unix: quick or run-it-once scripts are for Bash, serious and/or long life time scripts are for Python.
The big talk
In a Windows environment, Python is definitely the best choice since cmd is crappy and PowerShell has not really settled yet. What's more Python can run on several platform so it's a better investment. Finally, Python has a huge set of library so you will almost never hit the "god-I-can't-do-that" wall. This is not true for cmd and PowerShell.
In a Linux environment, this is a bit different. A lot of one liners are shorter, faster, more efficient and often more readable in pure Bash. But if you know your quick and dirty script is going to stay around for a while or will need to be improved, go for Python since it's far easier to maintain and extend and you will be able to do most of the task you can do with GNU tools with the standard library. And if you can't, you can still call the command-line from a Python script.
And of course you can call Python from the shell using -c option:
python -c "for line in open('/etc/fstab') : print line"
Some more literature about Python used for system administration tasks:
The IBM lab point of view.
A nice example to compare bash and python to script report.
The basics.
The must-have book.
Sure, python is a pretty good choice for those tasks (I'm sure many will recommend PowerShell instead).
Here is a fine introduction from that point of view:
http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/02/07/python-for-bash-scripters-a-well-kept-secret/
EDIT: About gnud's concern: http://www.portablepython.com/
Are you aware of PowerShell?
Anything is a good replacement for the Batch file system in windows. Perl, Python, Powershell are all good choices.
#BKB definitely has a valid concern. Here's a couple links you'll want to check if you run into any issues that can't be solved with the standard library:
Pywin32 is a package for working with low-level win32 APIs (advanced file system modifications, COM interfaces, etc.)
Tim Golden's Python page: he maintains a WMI wrapper package that builds off of Pywin32, but be sure to also check out his "Win32 How Do I" page for details on how to accomplish typical Windows tasks in Python.
Python is certainly well suited to that. If you're going down that road, you might also want to investigate SCons which is a build system itself built with Python. The cool thing is the build scripts are actually full-blown Python scripts themselves, so you can do anything in the build script that you could otherwise do in Python. It makes make look pretty anemic in comparison.
Upon rereading your question, I should note that SCons is more suited to building software projects than to writing system maintenance scripts. But I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Python to you in any case.
As a follow up, after some experimentation the thing I've found Python most useful for is any situation involving text manipulation (yourStringHere.replace(), regexes for more complex stuff) or testing some basic concept really quickly, which it is excellent for.
For stuff like SQL DB restore scripts I find I still usually just resort to batch files, as it's usually either something short enough that it actually takes more Python code to make the appropriate system calls or I can reuse snippets of code from other people reducing the writing time to just enough to tweak existing code to fit my needs.
As an addendum I would highly recommend IPython as a great interactive shell complete with tab completion and easy docstring access.
I've done a decent amount of scripting in both Linux/Unix and Windows environments, in Python, Perl, batch files, Bash, etc. My advice is that if it's possible, install Cygwin and use Bash (it sounds from your description like installing a scripting language or env isn't a problem?). You'll be more comfortable with that since the transition is minimal.
If that's not an option, then here's my take. Batch files are very kludgy and limited, but make a lot of sense for simple tasks like 'copy some files' or 'restart this service'. Python will be cleaner, easier to maintain, and much more powerful. However, the downside is that either you end up calling external applications from Python with subprocess, popen or similar. Otherwise, you end up writing a bunch more code to do things that are comparatively simple in batch files, like copying a folder full of files. A lot of this depends on what your scripts are doing. Text/string processing is going to be much cleaner in Python, for example.
Lastly, it's probably not an attractive alternative, but you might also consider VBScript as an alternative. I don't enjoy working with it as a language personally, but if portability is any kind of concern then it wins out by virtue of being available out of the box in any copy of Windows. Because of this I've found myself writing scripts that were unwieldy as batch files in VBScript instead, since I can't usually depend on Python or Perl or Bash being available on Windows.
Python, along with Pywin32, would be fine for Windows automation. However, VBScript or JScript used with the Windows Scripting Host works just as well, and requires nothing additional to install.
I've been using a lot of Windows Script Files lately. More powerful than batch scripts, and since it uses Windows scripting, there's nothing to install.
As much as I love python, I don't think it a good choice to replace basic windows batch scripts.
I can't see see someone having to import modules like sys, os or getopt to do basic things you can do with shell like call a program, check environment variable or an argument.
Also, in my experience, goto is much easier to understand to most sysadmins than a function call.