> I'm wondering what part of the twelve step compilation process was found to be easier than simply installing Python on the target machine?
That part is something that you can control.
Giving instructions for someone non-technical to install Python and run a script with it, and then helping them figure out how to interpret those instructions, is a heck of a lot more complicated.
And yeah, you can diddle around with cx_freeze and then having to spend some time with InnoSetup or WiX to build an installer, and then do the same on OS X but putting everything into an app bundle inside of a disk image instead, and finally on Linux trying to figure out how to bundle something up to play nicely with all of the major distros and packaging systems, and get something to work, though it doesn't support cross compilation so you now need to set up and maintain three different build machines, which is definitely no simpler than the solution described.
All of these solutions have their ups and downs. But being able to relatively easily (modulo installing a linker and a few libraries) cross compile from Rust to a static executable for any of the major desktop platforms is pretty nice, after you've dealt with enough of these funky build and packaging systems or trying to walk people through figuring out how to add Python to their path on Windows.
Not inconveniencing non-technical users cannot be underlined enough. I'd rather write this in C++ which I haven't touched in ten years than explaining my parents over the phone how to install Python or even just a screen sharing solution so that I can do it. I'm still traumatized from trying to get my dad to visit 192.168.1.1 in his browser.
Oh my dad wouldn't stand for that. If something happens, like malware, it would be my fault for making him put some "dodgy coding" in the internet and now every result in Google redirects to Adult Friend Finder and I am obliged to admit my wrongdoing and fix the problem - even though it's the address to his router portal...
> Giving instructions for someone non-technical to install Python and run a script with it, and then helping them figure out how to interpret those instructions, is a heck of a lot more complicated.
Training someone to accept binary file and run it without question is just dangerous.
Not really. It rather easy to assume someone's identity online and then make target person to run the binary without thinking twice, especially if such practice is already established.
That part is something that you can control.
Giving instructions for someone non-technical to install Python and run a script with it, and then helping them figure out how to interpret those instructions, is a heck of a lot more complicated.
And yeah, you can diddle around with cx_freeze and then having to spend some time with InnoSetup or WiX to build an installer, and then do the same on OS X but putting everything into an app bundle inside of a disk image instead, and finally on Linux trying to figure out how to bundle something up to play nicely with all of the major distros and packaging systems, and get something to work, though it doesn't support cross compilation so you now need to set up and maintain three different build machines, which is definitely no simpler than the solution described.
All of these solutions have their ups and downs. But being able to relatively easily (modulo installing a linker and a few libraries) cross compile from Rust to a static executable for any of the major desktop platforms is pretty nice, after you've dealt with enough of these funky build and packaging systems or trying to walk people through figuring out how to add Python to their path on Windows.