381–390 of 1001 posts
I gotta say, I feel pretty vindicated after hearing for years how Python’s tooling was just fine and you should just use virtualenv with pip and how JS must be worse, that when Python devs finally get a taste of npm/cargo/bundler in their ecosystem, they freaking love it. Because yes, npm has its issues but lock files and consistent installs are amazing
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have used pip freeze > requirements.txt pip install -r requirements.txt Way before "official" lockfile existed. Your requirements.txt becomes a lockfile, as long as you accept to not use ranges. Having this in a single tool etc why not, but I don't understand this hype, when it was basically already there.
I've never even understood the virtual env dogma. I can see how version conflicts _could_ happen, but they never have. Admittedly, I'm surprised I never have issues installing globally, especially since others keep telling me what a terrible idea it is and how they had nightmare-scenario-X happen to them.
A problem remain in that many and still more of the popular repositories don't use uv to manage their dependencies. So you are back having to use conda and the rest. Now, you have yet another package manager to handle. I wouldn't be harsh to engineers at astral who developed amazing tooling, but the issue with the python ecosystem isn't lack of tooling, it is the proliferation and fragmentation. To solve dependency m…
Conda solves a completely orthogonal set of problems, and is increasingly unnecessary. You can `pip install scipy` for example, and have been able to for a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Never underestimate cultural momentum I guess. NBA players shot long 2 pointers for decades before people realized 3 > 2. Doctors refused to wash their hands before doing procedures. There’s so many things that seem obvious in retrospect but took a long time to become accepted
[flagged]
For single-file Python scripts, which 99% of mine seem to be, you can simplify your life immensely by just putting this at the top of the script: #!/usr/bin/env -S uv run --script # /// script # requires-python = ">=3.11" # dependencies = [ "modules", "here" ] # /// The script now works like a standalone executable, and uv will magically install and use the specified modules.
If I were to put on my security hat, things like this give me shivers. It's one thing if you control the script and specified the dependencies. For any other use-case, you're trusting the script author to not install python dependencies that could be hiding all manner of defects or malicious intent. This isn't a knock against UV, but more a criticism of dynamic dependency resolution. I'd feel much better about this i…
For single-file Python scripts, which 99% of mine seem to be, you can simplify your life immensely by just putting this at the top of the script: #!/usr/bin/env -S uv run --script # /// script # requires-python = ">=3.11" # dependencies = [ "modules", "here" ] # /// The script now works like a standalone executable, and uv will magically install and use the specified modules.
If I were to put on my security hat, things like this give me shivers. It's one thing if you control the script and specified the dependencies. For any other use-case, you're trusting the script author to not install python dependencies that could be hiding all manner of defects or malicious intent. This isn't a knock against UV, but more a criticism of dynamic dependency resolution. I'd feel much better about this i…
It’s the script contents that count, not just dependencies.
Deno-style dependency version pinning doesn’t solve this problem unless you check every hash.
I gotta say, I feel pretty vindicated after hearing for years how Python’s tooling was just fine and you should just use virtualenv with pip and how JS must be worse, that when Python devs finally get a taste of npm/cargo/bundler in their ecosystem, they freaking love it. Because yes, npm has its issues but lock files and consistent installs are amazing
There is nothing I dread more within the general context of software development, broadly , than trying to run other people's Python projects. Nothing. It's shocking that it has been so bad for so long.
> Instead of > > source .venv/bin/activate > python myscript.py > > you can just do > > > uv run myscript > This is by far the biggest turn off for me. The whole point of an environment manager is set the environment so that the commands I run work. They need to run natively how they are supposed to when the environment is set, not put through a translation layer. Side rant: yes I get triggered whenever someone tells…
Unless I'm an AI, I'm pretty sure "uv run" is the same number of characters as "python". So it's shorter. Also venvs are a translation layer already, changing path.
I gotta say, I feel pretty vindicated after hearing for years how Python’s tooling was just fine and you should just use virtualenv with pip and how JS must be worse, that when Python devs finally get a taste of npm/cargo/bundler in their ecosystem, they freaking love it. Because yes, npm has its issues but lock files and consistent installs are amazing
But you are just using virtualenv with pip. It doesn't change any of the moving pieces except that uv is virtualenv aware and will set up / use them transparently. You've been able to have the exact same setup forever with pyenv and pyenv-virtualenv except with these nothing ever has to be prefixed. Look, uv is amazing and I would recommend it over everything else but Python devs have had this flow forever.
No, you aren't.
> It doesn't change any of the moving pieces
It literally does, though iyt maintains a mostly-parallel low-level interface, the implementation is replaced with improved (in speed, in dependency solving, and in other areas.) You are using virtual environments (but not venv/virtualenv) and the same sources that pip uses (but not pip).
> You've been able to have the exact same setup forever with pyenv and pyenv-virtualenv except with these nothing ever has to be prefixed.
Yes, you can do a subset of what uv does with those without prefixes, and if you add pipx and hatch (though with hatch you’ll be prefixing for much the same reason as in uv) you’ll get closer to uv’s functionality.
> Look, uv is amazing and I would recommend it over everything else but Python devs have had this flow forever.
If you ignore the parts of the flow built around modern Python packaging standards like pyproject.toml, sure, pieces of the flow have been around and supported by the right constellation of other standard and nonstandard tools for a while.