Hi Craig,Quote from dcraig:
Nonon,
The point is not whether Python or Ruby are better than Java. I can virtually guarantee that IB would not consider either as a platform for TWS. There just aren't enough people with the experience available and rightly or wrongly, management would see this as an unacceptable risk. It might be different in two years time. They also don't have the same corporate backing and support (SUN etc) as Java. Again, rightly or wrongly manangement will see this as a risk and it may well change over time.
If I was in their position, the first thing I would want to see would be a successfull real time GUI application of the complexity of TWS developed in Python and widely deployed on thousands of machines. I would be particulary interested in support issues. If such exists then lets hear about it.
For me, the issue boils down to whether TWS and it's API remain reasonably open and cross platform. At this point of time, taking a realistic view, I think it's Java or MS. I'll take Java anyday.
I'm not offering an opinion on Python as I don't know, but I've read some overblown claims like 5 x productivity gains. The history of computing is littered with claims of this sort that nearly always turn out to be wildly optimistic. And the points in some comparisons I've read, such as syntatically significant indenting replacing braces, weak typing and so on really havn't moved me much. We shall see how things turn out in the next few years.
Contrary to you, I have not the faintest idea of what IB's decision makers are thinking or planning. All I can say is that I think they did rather well up till now. They probably have a lot of IT problems to take care of, not unlike my own, albeit smaller ones.
You are slightly off with your: "GUI application of the complexity of TWS developed in Python".
In fact, the system I am running for my own profit and pleasure is QUITE a bit more complicated than TWS-client. Also GIU, intensive graphics, db, realtime, you name it. Even packaging it with an installer for windoz wouldn't be such a terrifying problem. Of course, it would require some work. After all they put 4 or 5 years into their current TWS. They have the advantage now to know what to put in it and what not.
If you would take some time to read up a bit on what people do with Python, you might change your mind on this. As to Python's cousin, Ruby, I didn't follow this in detail in the US but it appears that in Japan, Ruby is very much used on an industrial level. (AFAIK, Ruby in fact is of Japanese origin) They also ain't dummies there.
As to your speculations on the way IB management spends its time, I think that they probably have figured things out already, one way or another (they better did). We'll find out some day. I sincerely wish IB well and I hope they stay on top. The last couple of months, for me, their system ran well. They probably kicked a few butts here and there.
As nitro suggested, they should do some more work on "bringing FIX to the people" like they did with TWS some years ago. There is almost no "smart & people-friendly" competitor in this field. For me getting rid of platform and/or proprietary software (Java) dependent client software is a FIRST PRIORITY. (This opens a can of worms in answering whether Java, QT or others are really OSS or not.) However Java vs. QT+Python or other combinations require careful study. Dogmatic answers will certainly fail within a short time span.
