▲ 319 ▼ Package managers be like (linux.community) submitted 2 years ago by ExLisper@linux.community to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml 156 comments fedilink hide all child comments Sorry Python but it is what it is.
[–] Cwilliams@beehaw.org 11 points 2 years ago (2 children) What's so bad about pip? Imho, the venv thing is really nice permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ExLisper@linux.community [S] 10 points 2 years ago (4 children) vevn is not pip. The confusing set of different tools is part of the problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) cough npm,yarn,grunt,esbuild,webpack,parcel,rollup,lasso,rollup,etc.,etc.cough I'm not saying that Python's packaging ecosystem isn't complicated, but to paint JavaScript as anything other than nightmare fuel just isn't right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wraithcoop@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that's a fair comparison, the only two libraries that are related to the actual packaging system in that list is yarn and NPM. The rest of them have to do with the complexities of actually having your code runnable in the maximum number of browsers without issue. If python was the browser scripting language, it'd likely have the same issue. Is there a python package that transpiles and polyfills python3 to work in python 2? 2.7? 2.5? Also, unrelated to your comment, a lot of people are dunking on npm for the black hole that is node modules (which is valid), but also saying it's not pip's fault a lot of packages don't work. It's not npm's fault the package maintainers are including all these dependencies, and there are some 0-dependency packages out there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago* Is there a python 3 package that polyfills to Python 2? Plenty of 'em. You ever heard of the six library? permalink fedilink source parent [–] Cwilliams@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years ago Well I guess you could say the tools that integrate with pip are really good, then permalink fedilink source parent [–] fushuan@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not that confusing. There's like 5 main different tools in total, what are you going to code if you can't even set up the workspace? That's much simpler than an installation that depends on cuda or spark, and those only require setting up environment variables after installation anyway. As a programmer you'll encounter several redundant libraries and tools in your life where each has an edge in some use cases and you'll learn to use most to be able to adapt to the different projects you encounter, python's package manager tools are simply one of those. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ExLisper@linux.community [S] 1 point 2 years ago Of course there are more redundant tools. It doesn't make pip suck any less though. permalink fedilink source parent [–] wasabi@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago Just use poetry then permalink fedilink source parent [–] christophski@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago I genuinely don't get the hate for pip, been using it for 5 years and never had an issue permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ExLisper@linux.community [S] 10 points 2 years ago (4 children) vevn is not pip. The confusing set of different tools is part of the problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) cough npm,yarn,grunt,esbuild,webpack,parcel,rollup,lasso,rollup,etc.,etc.cough I'm not saying that Python's packaging ecosystem isn't complicated, but to paint JavaScript as anything other than nightmare fuel just isn't right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wraithcoop@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that's a fair comparison, the only two libraries that are related to the actual packaging system in that list is yarn and NPM. The rest of them have to do with the complexities of actually having your code runnable in the maximum number of browsers without issue. If python was the browser scripting language, it'd likely have the same issue. Is there a python package that transpiles and polyfills python3 to work in python 2? 2.7? 2.5? Also, unrelated to your comment, a lot of people are dunking on npm for the black hole that is node modules (which is valid), but also saying it's not pip's fault a lot of packages don't work. It's not npm's fault the package maintainers are including all these dependencies, and there are some 0-dependency packages out there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago* Is there a python 3 package that polyfills to Python 2? Plenty of 'em. You ever heard of the six library? permalink fedilink source parent [–] Cwilliams@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years ago Well I guess you could say the tools that integrate with pip are really good, then permalink fedilink source parent [–] fushuan@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not that confusing. There's like 5 main different tools in total, what are you going to code if you can't even set up the workspace? That's much simpler than an installation that depends on cuda or spark, and those only require setting up environment variables after installation anyway. As a programmer you'll encounter several redundant libraries and tools in your life where each has an edge in some use cases and you'll learn to use most to be able to adapt to the different projects you encounter, python's package manager tools are simply one of those. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ExLisper@linux.community [S] 1 point 2 years ago Of course there are more redundant tools. It doesn't make pip suck any less though. permalink fedilink source parent [–] wasabi@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago Just use poetry then permalink fedilink source parent
[–] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) cough npm,yarn,grunt,esbuild,webpack,parcel,rollup,lasso,rollup,etc.,etc.cough I'm not saying that Python's packaging ecosystem isn't complicated, but to paint JavaScript as anything other than nightmare fuel just isn't right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wraithcoop@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that's a fair comparison, the only two libraries that are related to the actual packaging system in that list is yarn and NPM. The rest of them have to do with the complexities of actually having your code runnable in the maximum number of browsers without issue. If python was the browser scripting language, it'd likely have the same issue. Is there a python package that transpiles and polyfills python3 to work in python 2? 2.7? 2.5? Also, unrelated to your comment, a lot of people are dunking on npm for the black hole that is node modules (which is valid), but also saying it's not pip's fault a lot of packages don't work. It's not npm's fault the package maintainers are including all these dependencies, and there are some 0-dependency packages out there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago* Is there a python 3 package that polyfills to Python 2? Plenty of 'em. You ever heard of the six library? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wraithcoop@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that's a fair comparison, the only two libraries that are related to the actual packaging system in that list is yarn and NPM. The rest of them have to do with the complexities of actually having your code runnable in the maximum number of browsers without issue. If python was the browser scripting language, it'd likely have the same issue. Is there a python package that transpiles and polyfills python3 to work in python 2? 2.7? 2.5? Also, unrelated to your comment, a lot of people are dunking on npm for the black hole that is node modules (which is valid), but also saying it's not pip's fault a lot of packages don't work. It's not npm's fault the package maintainers are including all these dependencies, and there are some 0-dependency packages out there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago* Is there a python 3 package that polyfills to Python 2? Plenty of 'em. You ever heard of the six library? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago* Is there a python 3 package that polyfills to Python 2? Plenty of 'em. You ever heard of the six library? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cwilliams@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years ago Well I guess you could say the tools that integrate with pip are really good, then permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fushuan@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not that confusing. There's like 5 main different tools in total, what are you going to code if you can't even set up the workspace? That's much simpler than an installation that depends on cuda or spark, and those only require setting up environment variables after installation anyway. As a programmer you'll encounter several redundant libraries and tools in your life where each has an edge in some use cases and you'll learn to use most to be able to adapt to the different projects you encounter, python's package manager tools are simply one of those. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ExLisper@linux.community [S] 1 point 2 years ago Of course there are more redundant tools. It doesn't make pip suck any less though. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ExLisper@linux.community [S] 1 point 2 years ago Of course there are more redundant tools. It doesn't make pip suck any less though. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] christophski@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago I genuinely don't get the hate for pip, been using it for 5 years and never had an issue permalink fedilink source parent