I was wondering what place scripting has in today's world of IDEs and GUIs.
I'm new to programming and am wondering at what point I should, if at all, open up the PowerShell terminal for a particular task. What do people here use scripting for and how important is it to a modern developer working full time with C++/C#/Java?
In general, you will want to write a script if you ever expect to do the task more than about twice. Making a script has the following advantages:
it's not dependent on human operation (humans are fallible)
it's repeatable
scripts can be stored in source control
This is well suited to tasks such as build, deployment, and automated testing.
IDEs and GUIs don't handle the testing or deployment parts of the development process well quite yet.
Scripting is also great when you want to do something quickly just to see. Personally, I use my Python interpreter as a super-calculator all the time. I also use it to parse files, combined with regular expressions.
Scripting is also often used to allow clients to easily extend a system's behavior. Using a script language, a compiler (or even an IDE) is not necessary.
See Extending Packages with Scripting for an example in SQL Server 2008.
Another point to add is that several servers which are highly used do not have any GUI. Everything is run from a terminal. Almost everything is run through a script. While GUIs are nice, they are not going to be used all the time.
Related
I am looking for something along the same lines as this article: "Go With Go(Lang): Features and Testing Frameworks", featuring Clojure/Clojurescript. Similarly, any book(s) that contain examples of Clojure/Clojurescript being used as to create devops/test-automation applications, would also help.
I am the developer behind spire, a clojure DSL for idempotent machine provisioning over ssh. I built it using GraalVM and sci. I have also used it for automated testing.
Presently I am working on making it a babashka pod, so soon you will be able to use its functionality directly from babashka.
I do virtually all my AWS manipulations using aws-api. The dev-ops experience via clojure is much better than using bash/shell scripts and the AWS CLI.
Your question is a bit vague, but Clojure is IMHO the best general-purpose computer language (no surprise since you asked on a Clojure site!).
One solution that might work for you is the Babashka tool. It allows you to turn Clojure code in to a stand-alone executable. So, instead of using quirky, fragile bash scripts, you can write a robust & powerful Clojure program that has the instant startup & low memory usage of a Go or C program.
For more general purposes, you can write a complete general-purpose Clojure program and interop with the outside O.S. with a function like tupelo.misc/shell-cmd or the original Clojure version from clojure.java.shell. I have used this to drive AWS CLI functions, for example listing, cloning, and deleting RDS database instances.
The sky is the limit (along with your imagination).
Update
I forgot to mention GraalVM. It allows you to compile Clojure code into a static executable (the same as produced by a C/C++ program). Here is a Clojure/GraalVM demo project that creates a "Hello World" program even faster and more memory efficient than a Python script! Enjoy!
I try to use this 2 projects for primitive gui testing automation:
http://www.ptfbpro.com/
http://www.autoitscript.com/
And I can't make my choice.
Can somebody explain me: why(in 2 or 3 lines) he use one of them(or other please specify)?
I use AutoIt...
because it's free, well documented (not only) from inside of the Scite Editor and you can easily compile your script into a small executable or even create a complete GUI and there is a very good community in the forums and around here. And its Basic-Like Syntax is really easy to understand, there are functions and even a foreach-syntax, dynamic arrays and lots of additional functions from other users... There's good integration with other programming languages and from the use of so many WinAPI functions you lack of very little possibilities. It can automate IE usage without even displaying a browser window and send network packages, you can send Keystrokes like a user sitting in front of your screen and there's the AU3Record Tool which allows you to just record a Macro and replay it or save it as a script and then you can easily optimize it and edit it for your needs. Or use the AutoIt Window Info tool to see all the possible handlings for your application, you can interact with any kind of program output/display according to different algorithms you may invent.
Enough facts? ;-)
Go with Autoit3. It 's a lot more reliable, and you have a complete script language. Ptfbpro is only a tool (not free), nothing more. AUtoit3 has a lot of contributors that can help you in your process, Ptfbpro is dead.
If you want a script taht really do what you want, just go for AutoIt. Ptfbpro can't be used as a professional tool.
Autoit3 as well. You really can't beat it for being free and so easy to use.
Which is better for quickly developing small utilities? AutoIt or AutoHotKey or something else?
I need to develop some small software for which I think using some professional suite like Visual Studio will be overkill. Most of the macro recording tools like AutoIt or AutoHotKey provide enough power to write decent application. Plus they are small and free.
Which option will be good? Using one of these tools or using some other small/free compiler?
They are both pretty good, and can do most of the same things... but I typically use AutoIt over AutoHotKey for the following reasons:
If you need a GUI at all, then you'll need to use AutoIt.
I prefer the syntax of AutoIt over AutoHotKey's. IMO, it is much easier to follow, and pick back up when you need to go back into your code later.
I like that AutoIt makes it very easy to change version numbers, icons, and compression of your compiled scripts (when compiling to exe). The default compression will sometimes cause false positives with some anti-virus software.
Ultimately, though, it really depends on what your requirements are for your small utilities.
Both are really good pieces of software and you will only decide by trying both of them out with tests that check if you can create your small bits of software.
Me personally I would probably investigate AutoIt in depth and if it started to mess me about I would then check AutoHotKey and others.
You can pretty much do whatever you can in one in the other, but I think it breaks down to: (1) short, keyboard shortcut driven utils and (2) more complex, UI driven scripts. For example:
I use AutoHotKey scripts every few minutes, and use AutoHotKey here over AutoIT because it's snappier to launch (ie via keyboard shortcuts).
I use AutoIT scripts every once in a while to do more complex things, such as to run multi-stage tasks that require a UI... or for when I would like to easily produce a compiled .exe
A project is looming whereby some code that I will be writing may be deployed on any hardware that potential clients happen to have. Its a business application that will be running 24/7 so I envisage that most of the host machines will be server type boxes but smaller clients might, for example, just have a simple PC.
A few more details about the code I will be writing:
There will be no GUI.
It will need to communicate with another bespoke 'black box' device over an Ethernet network.
It will need to communicate with a MySQL database somewhere on the network.
I don't have any performance concerns as a) the number of communications with the black box will be small, around 1 per second, and the amount of data exchanged will be tiny (around 1K each time), b) the number of read/writes with the database will be small, around 5 per minute, and again the amount of data exchanged will be tiny and c) the processing that needs to be performed is fairly simplistic.
Nothing I'm doing is very 'close to the metal' so I don't want to use languages that are too low level. Ease of development and ease of deployment are my main priorities.
I'm not expecting there to be a perfect solution so I can live with things like, for example, having to have slightly different configuration files for Windows machines than for Linux boxes etc. I would like to avoid having to compile the software for each host machine if possible though.
I would value your thoughts as to which development language you think is most suitable.
Cheers,
Jim
I'd go with a decent scripting language such as Python, Perl or Ruby personally. All of those have decent library support, can communicate easily with both local and remote MySQL databases and are pretty platform independent.
The first thing we need to know is what language skills you already have? This is likely to be a fairly big determiner of what choice you would ideally make.
If I was doing this I'd suggest Java for a couple of reasons:
It will run almost anywhere and meet the requirements you've outlined.
Its not an esoteric language so there will be plenty of developers.
I already know how to program in it!
Probably the most extensive library ecosystem of any of the development platforms.
Also note that you could write it in another language on the JVM if your more comfortable with Ruby or Python.
Sounds like Perl or Python would fit the bill perfectly. Which one you choose would depend on the expertise of the people building and supporting the system.
On the subject of scripting languages versus Java, I have been disappointed with developing command line tools using Java. You can't directly execute them, you have to (1) compile them and (2) write a shell script to execute the jar file, this script may differ between platforms. I recommend Python because it runs anywhere and it's got a great SQL library, mysql-python. The library is ready to use on Windows and Linux. Python also has a lot less boilerplate, you'll write fewer lines of code to do the same thing.
EDIT: when I talked about JARs being executable or not, I was talking about whether they are directly executable be the OS. You can, of course, double click on them to run them if your file manager is set up to do so. But when you're in a terminal window and you want to run a java program, you have to "java -jar myapp.jar" instead of the usual "./myapp.jar". In Python one just runs "./myapp.py" and doesn't have to worry about compiling or class paths.
If all platforms are standard PCs (or at least run Linux), then Python should be considered. You can compile it yourself if no package exists for your version. Also, you can strip the standard library easily from things that aren't available and which you don't need (sound support, for example).
Python doesn't need lots of resources, it's easy to learn and read.
If you know Perl, you can try that. If you don't use Perl on a daily basis, then don't. The Perl syntax is hard to remember and after a week, you'll wonder what the code did, even if you wrote it yourself.
Perl may be of help to you as it is available for many platforms and you can get almost any functionality by simply installing modules from CPAN.
Python or Java. They both are easy to deploy on both the server environments and the desktop environments you mention - i.e., Linux/Solaris and Windows.
Perl is also a nice choice, but it depends on how well you know Perl, how well other people that will maintain your code know Perl, and number of desktop users that are savvy enough to handle an install of the Windows Perl version(s).
As Java supports Python via Jython, I'd go with a JVM requirement myself, but I'd personally go with a Java application all the way for such a system you describe.
I would say use C or C++. They are platform independant, though you will have to compile for each platform.
Or use Java. That runs in a Virtual Machine so is truely cross platform and not a slow level as C.
As already discussed in "Lua as a general-purpose scripting language?" Lua currently probably isn't the best scripting language for the desktop environment.
But what do you think about the future? Will Lua get so popular that there will soon be enough libraries to be able to use it like Python, Ruby or something similar?
Or will it simply stay in it's WoW niche and that's it?
I think it has a great future, a lot of projects are starting to adopt it for it's simplicity and usefulness.
Example: Awesome WM (Window Manager)
The project recently released version 3, incorporating a new configuration system completely written in Lua. Allowing you to literally write your configuration file as a program, loops, booleans, data structures.
Personally I love the syntax and the flexibility of such a system, I think it has great potential.
I wouldn't be surprised if it became more popular in the future.
Brian G
I suppose the answer starts with 'It depends how you want to use it...'.
If you're writing the common business app (fetch the data from the database, display the data in a web page or window, save the data to the database), Lua already has what you need.
The Kepler Project contains goodies for web development. Check out their modules to see some of the available libraries - there's network, MVC, DBMS access, XML, zip, WSAPI, docs...
As an example web app, check out Sputnik.
For desktop UI, there's wxLua - Lua hooks for wxWidgets.
ORM is conspicuously missing but that didn't stop people from developing in other languages before ORM was available.
If you're looking for specialized libraries - scientific, multimedia , security - don't count Lua out before you check LuaForge.
When it comes down to it, there's nothing in Lua's design that prevents general purpose use. It just happens to be small, fast, and easy to embed... so people do.
Uh? I would say instead WoW is a niche in the Lua ecosystem... The world of Lua doesn't revolve around WoW, there are lot of applications, some big like Adobe Lightroom (to take a non game), using Lua.
Lua is initially a scripting language, in the initial sense, ie. made to be embedded in an application to script it. But it is also designed as an extensible language, so we will see progressively more and more bindings of various libraries for various purposes.
But you will never get an official big distribution with batteries included, like Python or Perl, because it is just not the philosophy of the authors.
Which doesn't prevent other people to make distributions including lot of features out of the box (for Windows, particularly, where it is difficult to build the softwares).
Lot of people already use it for general system-level scripting, desktop applications, and such anyway.
There are more and more libraries for Lua.
If you are a Windows user, have look at Lua for Windows. It comes with "batteries included" (wxLua, LuaCURL, LuaUnit, getopt, LuaXML, LPeg...).
Very usefull!
It's 2017, 9 years after this question was first asked, and lua is now being heavily used in the field of machine learning due to the Torch library.
I really like it as an embedded language. It's small, very easy to use and embed and mostly does what I need right out of the box. It's also similar enough to most languages that it has never really been an issue for me. I also like how easy it is to redefine and add base functions and keywords to the language to suit whatever needs my application has.
I have used it in the WoW area but I've also found it useful as a generic scripting language for a number of different applications I've worked on, including as a type of database trigger. I like Ruby and Python and other more full-featured scripting languages but they're not nearly as convenient for embedding in small applications to give users more options for customizing their environments.
being comfortable as a shell language has nothing to do with being a great general purpose language.
i, for one, don't use it embedded in other applications; i write my applications in Lua, and anything 'extra' is a special-purpose library, either in Lua or in C.
Also, being 'popular' isn't so important. in the Lua-users list periodically someone appears that says "Lua won't be popular unless it does X!", and the usual answer is either: "great!, write it!", or "already discussed and rejected".
I think the great feature of Lua is, that it is very easily extensible. It is very easy to add the Lua interpreter to a program of your own (e.g. one written in C, C++ or Obj-C) and with just a few lines of code, you can give Lua access to any system resource you can think of. E.g. Lua offers no function to do xxx. Write one and make it available to Lua. But it's also possible the other way round. Write your own Lua extension in a language of your choice (one that is compilable), compile it into a native library, load the library within Lua and you can use the function.
That said, Lua might not be the best choice as a standalone crossplatform language. But Lua is a great language to add scripting support to your application in a crossplatform manner (if your app is crossplatform, the better!). I think Lua will have a future and I think you can expect that this language will constantly gain popularity in the long run.
Warhammer Online, and World of Warcraft use it for their addon language I believe.
I think it's hot! I'm just no good at it!
Well, greetings from 2022.
It is already a general purpose language. Today you can even serve pages using OpenResty, extend games, read databases or create scripts as shellscript replacements.
There are a plenty of libraries "modules" for Lua, many ways to achieve what you are wanting and Lua 5.4 is even faster.
The "extendable and extensive" nature of Lua, accostumed people to think it should only be used as plugin or extension. In Linux, by example, you can shebang a file with lua-any, make it executable and run like any system script. Or you can make a folder app like Python or virtualenv using Lupe. Lua 5.3 also gained impressive performance improvements.
Also there are many good tools like IUP to create native windows in Lua for Mac, BSD, Linux and Windows and side environments like Terra that lets you use Lua with its counterpart Terra and write compiled programs. Lua now, is more than a extension language, it has its own universe.