[Ground-station] Link budget

[John R. Frank]

+1 on the suggestion of making UIs with web technologies.  This is why
JavaScript/TypeScript are so widely adopted.  Backend communicating with
frontend over HTTP has many benefits.



On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 8:52 AM Joseph Armbruster <
josepharmbruster at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> John,
>
>
> I am new to the list as well, but it’s not entirely clear to me from the
> thread, what specifically is going to be developed?  Are these one-off
> support/automation kinda scripts that are for development purposes?  Is it
> something maybe a bit more heavy like a native / cross-platform UI?  I feel
> that some of your requirements for a language would derive from the
> use-case itself.
>
>
> UI development in Python is ugly.  And by that, I mean the UIs themselves
> are ugly.  If you want something native you’re likely better off using
> C++/QT and then if you want, exposing some kind of Python API that people
> could use to interface with whatever you wish to expose.  It’s super easy
> to create ‘scriptable’ interfaces for c/c++ apps using lua, python, etc
> these days.  Another alternative is having the program you deploy, just
> host a web service and then use Electron for the frontend.  That way, the
> entire UI is all regular html/js/css.
>
>
> There’s also something to be said about the community surrounding it and
> the set of libraries available for various purposes.  Python has both a
> rich standard library and very large set of additional libraries available,
> across domains (mathematics, compgeo, telemetry, geospatial, etc…), all
> useful items.  You name it, you can quite likely find it for Python.
>
>
> Joseph Armbruster
>
> KJ4JIO
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 9:39 PM John R. Frank via Ground-Station
> <ground-station at lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:
>
>> Hi.   I'm new to this list and want to offer three comments on languages,
>> in case these perspectives are helpful:
>>
>> (1) It's easier to build larger projects on widely adopted languages,
>> like python [1] [2], because: (a) easier to recruit, and (b) more
>> libraries.  Python comes with "batteries included."[3]
>>
>> (2) I love python because it's so easy to write good medium-sized
>> programs.  However, many python developers have been converting to Golang
>> [4].  My most recent startup did a groundup rewrite from python over to
>> golang at about halfway through its seven-year journey.  We did this for
>> two reasons:  (a) Python fundamentally cannot do concurrent programming
>> inside the language [5] while concurrency is so central to Golang that its
>> almost in the Hello World [6], and (b) Golang's strong-typing helps
>> structures stay clean even when you have many people working in the code
>> base.
>>
>> (3) That said, when writing high performance code, all the kool kids that
>> previously did C/C++ are now jumping on Rust, because Rust let's
>> the programmer manually control memory in a more powerful way than previous
>> languages [7].
>>
>> Regards,
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] data animation of Most Popular Programming Languages 1965 - 2019
>> <https://youtu.be/Og847HVwRSI>
>>
>> [2] https://octoverse.github.com/ see plot of most widely used languages
>> over recent years
>>
>> [3] https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/stdlib.html#batteries-included
>>
>> [4] https://www.google.com/search?q=switching+from+python+to+golang
>>
>> [5]
>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2150144/is-python-a-serious-option-for-concurrent-programming
>>
>> [6] https://tour.golang.org/concurrency/1
>>
>> [7]
>> https://pcwalton.github.io/2013/03/18/an-overview-of-memory-management-in-rust.html
>>
>>
>> --
>> John R. Frank
>> N9WLY
>> https://www.mit.edu/~jrf/
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openresearch.institute/pipermail/ground-station-openresearch.institute/attachments/20210121/07c16981/attachment.html>