python embedded

[covitti]

Hi,
congratulation Phil, i love your tinypy project.
I'm a phd student, i need to write system scripts (like handling
file system writing ls, cp command and so, and process-control
primitives) in a small footprint python for embedded systems. Then i
thought to start from tinypy. Do u think could it be a good approach
to write a "posix" module for tinypy? Have u any suggestion?
I need it to work only on Linux, so i don't care to keep the
compatibility with others operating systems. To be more clear my idea
is to do something similar to"deeply embedded python"... but i guess u
know that project is not more active. Have u any suggestion? Thanks in
advance :)
again congratulation for your work.
Vittoria

[René Dudfield]

Hello,

there's example modules included in the tinypy source. They're
probably the best place to look for writing new modules.

Also you might be interested in the python-on-a-chip project... which
is another small python implementation.
http://code.google.com/p/python-on-a-chip/


cheers,

[Dean Hall]

Python-on-a-chip would not be a good solution because it doesn't have
string formatting "%d, %f, %s etc."
If all the scripts are command-line oriented, I would recommend TCL;
that's exactly what it's made for.

Here are small implementations: http://wiki.tcl.tk/1363

!!Dean

[covitti]

I have an idea...
not totally clear in my mind how to implement it...
what i'd like to invent is a thing called "Pybox" or may be
"Tinypybox".
U know for sure the tool Busybox, it combines tiny versions of many
common UNIX utilities into a single small executable and it's written
in C.
I'd like to have UNIX utilities written in a language Python-like
small as tinypy and then to use it inside an embedded Linux file
system.

Is it more clear now?

[Donny Viszneki]

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 12:23 PM, covitti<cov...@gmail.com> wrote:
> U know for sure the tool Busybox, it combines tiny versions of many
> common UNIX utilities into a single small executable and it's written
> in C.
> I'd like to have UNIX utilities written in a language Python-like
> small as tinypy and then to use it inside an embedded Linux file
> system.

Is your goal to create something even smaller than Busybox? Certainly
most individual Python programs are shorter than their C counterparts,
both in terms of source code and compiled program size. You'd have to
implement a *lot* of C programs, though, for the per-program savings
to overcome the 64k tinypy overhead. A very worthy experiment!

--
http://codebad.com/

[covitti]

absolutely not,
i don't want do better then busybox!!
I want do it with an interpreted language and do comparitions.
It's a study work, part of my final thesis

On Sep 7, 9:05 pm, Donny Viszneki <donny.viszn...@gmail.com> wrote: