News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Announcing .NET Core 1.0 by oblio on Monday June 27, 2016 @03:17PM (#11988680)
Well, besides libraries, performance.

.NET supports proper multithreading (no GIL) and it is also much faster than CPython.

If IronPython gets ported to .NET Core (maybe it already has, I don't know), then you'd get those benefits for free.

Re:Announcing .NET Core 1.0 by BuckRogers on Wednesday June 29, 2016 @02:42AM (#11999915)
For me, the GIL is a feature. Proper pthreading is for systems software as I see it. If you're rewriting Apache or IIS then you may need to bring in Rust, C(++).

I never found platforms like .Net and Java to be low level enough to write systems software, where you'd definitely want multithreading, and not high level enough to be as convenient as Python.

I write in Python and then use PyPy for more CPU intensive services. If I wanted multithreading and instances won't cut it, it would be a pretty hardcore usecase (for a lone wolf like me), I'd most likely also need no GC so I'd reach for something like Rust rather than C#.

I hate to say "no" to learning anything, but to be the devil's advocate this is how I've always seen it.

Re:Announcing .NET Core 1.0 by sremani on Monday June 27, 2016 @03:34PM (#11988818)
In the public repos, there no substantial new work taking place with IronPython.
Re:Announcing .NET Core 1.0 by cbHXBY1D on Monday June 27, 2016 @10:25PM (#11991079)
If there was enough interest you could get the Microsoft Python team to support IronPython. There's been talk of a renewed effort.

[1] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/pythonengineering/

Re:Announcing .NET Core 1.0 by bad_user on Tuesday June 28, 2016 @10:39AM (#11994126)
The performance of IronPython was horrible and Python being an ecosystem of libraries built in C and wrapped in a Python API, it makes alternatives to be unusable, since most Python libraries that matter are incompatible.