I have here an 18.27 megabyet executable which, when working properly, produces exactly one line of console output. Oh boy, the joys of Python and Nuitka.
@jaybird110127@fastfinge Does it need to be an executable if it's a tool just for your own use? I use quite a few of my own Python tools without dealing with the thorny issues of packaging them up as .exes.
@jscholes@jaybird110127 I often package them up if they need to run on a different machine from the machine I developed them on. Saves dealing with setting up a virtual environment and so on.
@fastfinge@jaybird110127 Perhaps. Tools like uvx are somewhat making that a problem of the past, particularly as they can transparently manage Python installations. If you're gonna download an executable to another machine, it may as well be the smaller one that does more and gives you access to all your projects.
@jscholes@jaybird110127 You're assuming I want to install uv and modify the path and keep uv up to date and have multiple python versions on the machine. And in one particular case, that the machine has an internet connection at all.
@fastfinge I don't think I'm assuming most of those things.
I'm assuming that you're happy copying one or more executables to another machine, each of which comes with its own Python environment even if they use the same underlying Python version. I'm assuming that because you said you were.
At which point, for many use cases it seems objectively better to use a tool that is also a single executable, doesn't require you to manage Python at all or even install it, and can update both itself and your tools. If you don't want to change the PATH and wouldn't have done so for your other executables, don't. That's up to you.
I was assuming internet access, true. Mostly because I think the tool that started this thread requires it.
Anyway, figured I'd mention it for people who weren't aware. Python has a reputation for being historically annoying to manage which isn't as much the case anymore. It doesn't even need to be installed in the first place to use uv and uvx. @jaybird110127
@jscholes@jaybird110127 Yup, I love uv. It just feels like huge overkill for anything but the machine I actually develop on. And I think uv needs you to modify the path, in order to do everything it does, but I could be wrong. Also, don't modern Python packagers do some tree-shaking so they're not including the complete Python environment in every single build? I know that NVDA's environment, to my sorrow, doesn't include multiprocess, for example, because NVDA doesn't use it. So if I want it in my addons, I have to include it myself, even though it's a Python builtin.
