Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 06:32:57PM +0200, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
 
  Hi Jean-Pierre,
I know that you made a question but I haven't seen it. I got only a
truncated message with quoted text...

This happens sometimes, and I don't know why... the only pattern I see
is that those messages are sent from sun machines...

   If I remember your question from mail-archive the answer is yes. Python
has one module to cgi.

-- 
José

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 06:32:57PM +0200, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
 
  Hi Jean-Pierre,
I know that you made a question but I haven't seen it. I got only a
truncated message with quoted text...

This happens sometimes, and I don't know why... the only pattern I see
is that those messages are sent from sun machines...

   If I remember your question from mail-archive the answer is yes. Python
has one module to cgi.

-- 
José

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 06:32:57PM +0200, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
> 
  Hi Jean-Pierre,
I know that you made a question but I haven't seen it. I got only a
truncated message with quoted text...

This happens sometimes, and I don't know why... the only pattern I see
is that those messages are sent from sun machines...

   If I remember your question from mail-archive the answer is yes. Python
has one module to cgi.

-- 
José

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Francisco Stefano Wechsler]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, George De Bruin wrote:

 Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 15:04:55 -0500
 From: George De Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Reuben Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED],
  LyX Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

 On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:

  There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather

 I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

 --
 George J. De Bruin
 Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
 0l0rin's latest recording Collection is available now!


  The site is OK. I connected to it last Friday, as well as today.

Francisco Stefano Wechsler  Diga não ao monopólio: use Gnu-Linux.
Dep. Prod. Expl. Animal Enviado por meio do PINE 4.33.
Fac. Med. Vet. Zoot.Que a força do pingüim esteja contigo!
UNESP
C.P. 560
18618-000 Botucatu, SP
Brasil

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[George De Bruin]

On Tuesday 29 May 2001 23:46, Allan Rae wrote:

 FWIW, a number of Python folk are interested in LyX -- both for personal
 use (with python.cls etc.) and as a possible unofficial documenting tool.
 Their official documenting tools are a couple of scripts and any text
 editor and they aren't about to change that in a hurry.  I know a couple
 of people in particular who are Python gurus (one's a Python Team member)
 who would love to get their hands dirty in LyX (with Python of course).

This would appear to support the idea I was putting forth: for each language, 
we should have someone (or multiple people) interested in doing the support 
of that langauge within LyX.  That way we (a) gain their expertise, and (b) 
we don't dilute the development efforts of the LyX Team.

 Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
 it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
 bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
 second language.

Would it be such a big deal if someone actually wanted to do it (ie, support 
Scheme/Lisp)?  Assuming that we make the space for them to work available, 
then we could share in knowledge, and gain from having more languages 
available.

And, this would probably work well for those interested in having Lua support 
as well

-- 
George J. De Bruin
Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
0l0rin's latest recording Collection is available now!

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Francisco Stefano Wechsler]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, George De Bruin wrote:

 Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 15:04:55 -0500
 From: George De Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Reuben Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED],
  LyX Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

 On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:

  There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather

 I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

 --
 George J. De Bruin
 Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
 0l0rin's latest recording Collection is available now!


  The site is OK. I connected to it last Friday, as well as today.

Francisco Stefano Wechsler  Diga não ao monopólio: use Gnu-Linux.
Dep. Prod. Expl. Animal Enviado por meio do PINE 4.33.
Fac. Med. Vet. Zoot.Que a força do pingüim esteja contigo!
UNESP
C.P. 560
18618-000 Botucatu, SP
Brasil

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[George De Bruin]

On Tuesday 29 May 2001 23:46, Allan Rae wrote:

 FWIW, a number of Python folk are interested in LyX -- both for personal
 use (with python.cls etc.) and as a possible unofficial documenting tool.
 Their official documenting tools are a couple of scripts and any text
 editor and they aren't about to change that in a hurry.  I know a couple
 of people in particular who are Python gurus (one's a Python Team member)
 who would love to get their hands dirty in LyX (with Python of course).

This would appear to support the idea I was putting forth: for each language, 
we should have someone (or multiple people) interested in doing the support 
of that langauge within LyX.  That way we (a) gain their expertise, and (b) 
we don't dilute the development efforts of the LyX Team.

 Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
 it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
 bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
 second language.

Would it be such a big deal if someone actually wanted to do it (ie, support 
Scheme/Lisp)?  Assuming that we make the space for them to work available, 
then we could share in knowledge, and gain from having more languages 
available.

And, this would probably work well for those interested in having Lua support 
as well

-- 
George J. De Bruin
Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
0l0rin's latest recording Collection is available now!

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Francisco Stefano Wechsler]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, George De Bruin wrote:

> Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 15:04:55 -0500
> From: George De Bruin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Reuben Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  LyX Users mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)
>
> On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>
> > There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
>
> I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(
>
> --
> George J. De Bruin
> Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
> 0l0rin's latest recording "Collection" is available now!
>

  The site is OK. I connected to it last Friday, as well as today.

Francisco Stefano Wechsler  Diga não ao monopólio: use Gnu-Linux.
Dep. Prod. Expl. Animal Enviado por meio do PINE 4.33.
Fac. Med. Vet. Zoot.Que a força do pingüim esteja contigo!
UNESP
C.P. 560
18618-000 Botucatu, SP
Brasil

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[George De Bruin]

On Tuesday 29 May 2001 23:46, Allan Rae wrote:

> FWIW, a number of Python folk are interested in LyX -- both for personal
> use (with python.cls etc.) and as a possible unofficial documenting tool.
> Their official documenting tools are a couple of scripts and any text
> editor and they aren't about to change that in a hurry.  I know a couple
> of people in particular who are Python gurus (one's a Python Team member)
> who would love to get their hands dirty in LyX (with Python of course).

This would appear to support the idea I was putting forth: for each language, 
we should have someone (or multiple people) interested in doing the support 
of that langauge within LyX.  That way we (a) gain their expertise, and (b) 
we don't dilute the development efforts of the LyX Team.

> Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
> it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
> bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
> second language.

Would it be such a big deal if someone actually wanted to do it (ie, support 
Scheme/Lisp)?  Assuming that we make the space for them to work available, 
then we could share in knowledge, and gain from having more languages 
available.

And, this would probably work well for those interested in having Lua support 
as well

-- 
George J. De Bruin
Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
0l0rin's latest recording "Collection" is available now!

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Erkko Airo]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:
 
  There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
 
 I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

The link above doesn't seem to work now, but there is a working mirror
at:

http://www.tecgraf.puc-rio.br/lua/

e.airo
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/1122/
Erkon puheita on mukava kuunnella vaikkei niistä aina 
mitään tolkkua saakaan. P. Monto, Talouselämä 6/99

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Erkko Airo]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:
 
  There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
 
 I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

The link above doesn't seem to work now, but there is a working mirror
at:

http://www.tecgraf.puc-rio.br/lua/

e.airo
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/1122/
Erkon puheita on mukava kuunnella vaikkei niistä aina 
mitään tolkkua saakaan. P. Monto, Talouselämä 6/99

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Erkko Airo]

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> 
> > There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
> 
> I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

The link above doesn't seem to work now, but there is a working mirror
at:

http://www.tecgraf.puc-rio.br/lua/

e.airo
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.geocities.com/soho/gallery/1122/
"Erkon puheita on mukava kuunnella vaikkei niistä aina 
mitään tolkkua saakaan." P. Monto, Talouselämä 6/99

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[George De Bruin]

On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:

 There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather

I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

-- 
George J. De Bruin
Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
0l0rin's latest recording Collection is available now!

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[George De Bruin]

On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:

 There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather

I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

-- 
George J. De Bruin
Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
0l0rin's latest recording Collection is available now!

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[George De Bruin]

On Friday 01 June 2001 05:16, Reuben Thomas wrote:

> There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather

I just tried to go to this site, but couldn't connect to it...:(

-- 
George J. De Bruin
Check Out 0l0rin's New Age compositions at http://mp3.com/0l0rin
0l0rin's latest recording "Collection" is available now!

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Reuben Thomas]

   Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
   it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
   bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
   second language.

There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
simpler, and was specifically designed a) to be embedded in applications and
b) as an application extension language. A typical build of the compiler/
run-time-system and standard library shared libraries is about 100kb (hence
you can easily link it statically if that's easier without much bloat).

It's a lovely little language with clean syntax, such that configuration
files can be written directly in it (if you like), and reflection of C
functions into Lua is extrememly easy.

Lua is BSD-ish licensed, and written in pure (and I do mean pure) ANSI C. It
compiles out of the box on almost anything (and it has been ported, among
other odd environments, to Palm OS, EPOC and RISC OS; indeed, on the last
two it compiles without alteration).

It is widely used as an embedded application control language, especially
for scripting game engines.

-- 
http://sc3d.org/rrt/ | Caution Children At Play Drive Slowly

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Reuben Thomas]

   Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
   it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
   bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
   second language.

There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
simpler, and was specifically designed a) to be embedded in applications and
b) as an application extension language. A typical build of the compiler/
run-time-system and standard library shared libraries is about 100kb (hence
you can easily link it statically if that's easier without much bloat).

It's a lovely little language with clean syntax, such that configuration
files can be written directly in it (if you like), and reflection of C
functions into Lua is extrememly easy.

Lua is BSD-ish licensed, and written in pure (and I do mean pure) ANSI C. It
compiles out of the box on almost anything (and it has been ported, among
other odd environments, to Palm OS, EPOC and RISC OS; indeed, on the last
two it compiles without alteration).

It is widely used as an embedded application control language, especially
for scripting game engines.

-- 
http://sc3d.org/rrt/ | Caution Children At Play Drive Slowly

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Reuben Thomas]

> > > Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
> > > it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
> > > bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
> > > second language.

There's also Lua (www.lua.org), which is much smaller than python, rather
simpler, and was specifically designed a) to be embedded in applications and
b) as an application extension language. A typical build of the compiler/
run-time-system and standard library shared libraries is about 100kb (hence
you can easily link it statically if that's easier without much bloat).

It's a lovely little language with clean syntax, such that configuration
files can be written directly in it (if you like), and reflection of C
functions into Lua is extrememly easy.

Lua is BSD-ish licensed, and written in pure (and I do mean pure) ANSI C. It
compiles out of the box on almost anything (and it has been ported, among
other odd environments, to Palm OS, EPOC and RISC OS; indeed, on the last
two it compiles without alteration).

It is widely used as an embedded application control language, especially
for scripting game engines.

-- 
http://sc3d.org/rrt/ | Caution Children At Play Drive Slowly

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[ben]

Allan Rae a écrit :

 [...]

 Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
 it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
 bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
 second language.

What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose this
language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this language...
Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

BG

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:58:18PM +0200, ben wrote:
 Allan Rae a écrit :
 
  [...]
 
  Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
  it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
  bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
  second language.
 
 What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose this
 language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this language...
 Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

  Python is a general purpose, script language.
  
  I will not tell you what are the advantage of python over perl, I will
just tell you why I like python over perl.

  I have used perl before, and now I use python because the syntax is very
clear, the programs are easy to read after two years without looking to them.

  I like the clear OO model over the one in perl.

  Most of the time I use it as prototype language before passing it to
C(++), when I need speed.

  Other times I use it as glue language both to write the tools I use to
treat the simulation data I get and to automate the action of different
other programs.

  The clear syntax is a big win for me, and although it is possible to write
programs that are easy to read with perl it is a lot more dificult to do so.
  
  I need lots of time to use number crunching programs and the Numerical
module is superb for that. I mention this because python is very easy to
extend. That was the reason why the authors of the Module decided to use it.

  All the aspects of the language appear to be very well thought, and this
is a feeling that grows as you learn more about it.

  One other feature I like is ability to run it in an interactive session.
  
  Just some thoughts, there is very good documentation at
http://www.python.org

 BG

  A-python-convict ly
-- 
José

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jean-Pierre.Chretien]

Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:09:14 +0100
From: Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: LyX Users [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)
Mail-Followup-To: LyX Users [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:58:18PM +0200, ben wrote:
 Allan Rae a écrit :
 
  [...]
 
  Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
  it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
  bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
  second language.
 
 What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose 
this
 language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this 
language...
 Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

  Python is a general purpose, script language.
  
  I will not tell you what are the advantage of python over perl, I will
just tell you why I like python over perl.

  I have used perl before, and now I use python because the syntax is very
clear, the programs are easy to read after two years without looking to them.

  I like the clear OO model over the one in perl.

  Most of the time I use it as prototype language before passing it to
C(++), when I need speed.

  Other times I use it as glue language both to write the tools I use to
treat the simulation data I get and to automate the action of different
other programs.

  The clear syntax is a big win for me, and although it is possible to write
programs that are easy to read with perl it is a lot more dificult to do so.
  
  I need lots of time to use number crunching programs and the Numerical
module is superb for that. I mention this because python is very easy to
extend. That was the reason why the authors of the Module decided to use it.

  All the aspects of the language appear to be very well thought, and this
is a feeling that grows as you learn more about it.

  One other feature I like is ability to run it in an interactive session.
  
  Just some thoughts, there is very good documentation at
http://www.python.org

 BG

  A-python-convict ly
-- 
José

Any equivalent of the CGI.pm Perl module and the various gateways
towards SGBD or OLE data structures ? (a bit off the LyX thread, but...)

-- 
Jean-Pierre

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[ben]

Allan Rae a écrit :

 [...]

 Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
 it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
 bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
 second language.

What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose this
language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this language...
Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

BG

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:58:18PM +0200, ben wrote:
 Allan Rae a écrit :
 
  [...]
 
  Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
  it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
  bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
  second language.
 
 What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose this
 language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this language...
 Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

  Python is a general purpose, script language.
  
  I will not tell you what are the advantage of python over perl, I will
just tell you why I like python over perl.

  I have used perl before, and now I use python because the syntax is very
clear, the programs are easy to read after two years without looking to them.

  I like the clear OO model over the one in perl.

  Most of the time I use it as prototype language before passing it to
C(++), when I need speed.

  Other times I use it as glue language both to write the tools I use to
treat the simulation data I get and to automate the action of different
other programs.

  The clear syntax is a big win for me, and although it is possible to write
programs that are easy to read with perl it is a lot more dificult to do so.
  
  I need lots of time to use number crunching programs and the Numerical
module is superb for that. I mention this because python is very easy to
extend. That was the reason why the authors of the Module decided to use it.

  All the aspects of the language appear to be very well thought, and this
is a feeling that grows as you learn more about it.

  One other feature I like is ability to run it in an interactive session.
  
  Just some thoughts, there is very good documentation at
http://www.python.org

 BG

  A-python-convict ly
-- 
José

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jean-Pierre.Chretien]

Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:09:14 +0100
From: Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: LyX Users [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)
Mail-Followup-To: LyX Users [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:58:18PM +0200, ben wrote:
 Allan Rae a écrit :
 
  [...]
 
  Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
  it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
  bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
  second language.
 
 What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose 
this
 language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this 
language...
 Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

  Python is a general purpose, script language.
  
  I will not tell you what are the advantage of python over perl, I will
just tell you why I like python over perl.

  I have used perl before, and now I use python because the syntax is very
clear, the programs are easy to read after two years without looking to them.

  I like the clear OO model over the one in perl.

  Most of the time I use it as prototype language before passing it to
C(++), when I need speed.

  Other times I use it as glue language both to write the tools I use to
treat the simulation data I get and to automate the action of different
other programs.

  The clear syntax is a big win for me, and although it is possible to write
programs that are easy to read with perl it is a lot more dificult to do so.
  
  I need lots of time to use number crunching programs and the Numerical
module is superb for that. I mention this because python is very easy to
extend. That was the reason why the authors of the Module decided to use it.

  All the aspects of the language appear to be very well thought, and this
is a feeling that grows as you learn more about it.

  One other feature I like is ability to run it in an interactive session.
  
  Just some thoughts, there is very good documentation at
http://www.python.org

 BG

  A-python-convict ly
-- 
José

Any equivalent of the CGI.pm Perl module and the various gateways
towards SGBD or OLE data structures ? (a bit off the LyX thread, but...)

-- 
Jean-Pierre

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[ben]

Allan Rae a écrit :

> [...]
>
> Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
> it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
> bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
> second language.

What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose this
language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this language...
Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

BG

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:58:18PM +0200, ben wrote:
> Allan Rae a écrit :
> 
> > [...]
> >
> > Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
> > it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
> > bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
> > second language.
> 
> What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose this
> language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this language...
> Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.

  Python is a general purpose, script language.
  
  I will not tell you what are the advantage of python over perl, I will
just tell you why I like python over perl.

  I have used perl before, and now I use python because the syntax is very
clear, the programs are easy to read after two years without looking to them.

  I like the clear OO model over the one in perl.

  Most of the time I use it as prototype language before passing it to
C(++), when I need speed.

  Other times I use it as glue language both to write the tools I use to
treat the simulation data I get and to automate the action of different
other programs.

  The clear syntax is a big win for me, and although it is possible to write
programs that are easy to read with perl it is a lot more dificult to do so.
  
  I need lots of time to use number crunching programs and the Numerical
module is superb for that. I mention this because python is very easy to
extend. That was the reason why the authors of the Module decided to use it.

  All the aspects of the language appear to be very well thought, and this
is a feeling that grows as you learn more about it.

  One other feature I like is ability to run it in an interactive session.
  
  Just some thoughts, there is very good documentation at
http://www.python.org

> BG

  A-python-convict ly
-- 
José

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Jean-Pierre.Chretien]

>>Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:09:14 +0100
>>From: Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: LyX Users <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)
>>Mail-Followup-To: LyX Users <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
>>
>>On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:58:18PM +0200, ben wrote:
>>> Allan Rae a écrit :
>>> 
>>> > [...]
>>> >
>>> > Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
>>> > it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
>>> > bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
>>> > second language.
>>> 
>>> What are the advantages of python in comparison to perl? For what purpose 
this
>>> language was developped for? I ask this because I don't know this 
language...
>>> Besides, I agree that scheme/lisp is perfectly horrible.
>>
>>  Python is a general purpose, script language.
>>  
>>  I will not tell you what are the advantage of python over perl, I will
>>just tell you why I like python over perl.
>>
>>  I have used perl before, and now I use python because the syntax is very
>>clear, the programs are easy to read after two years without looking to them.
>>
>>  I like the clear OO model over the one in perl.
>>
>>  Most of the time I use it as prototype language before passing it to
>>C(++), when I need speed.
>>
>>  Other times I use it as glue language both to write the tools I use to
>>treat the simulation data I get and to automate the action of different
>>other programs.
>>
>>  The clear syntax is a big win for me, and although it is possible to write
>>programs that are easy to read with perl it is a lot more dificult to do so.
>>  
>>  I need lots of time to use number crunching programs and the Numerical
>>module is superb for that. I mention this because python is very easy to
>>extend. That was the reason why the authors of the Module decided to use it.
>>
>>  All the aspects of the language appear to be very well thought, and this
>>is a feeling that grows as you learn more about it.
>>
>>  One other feature I like is ability to run it in an interactive session.
>>  
>>  Just some thoughts, there is very good documentation at
>>http://www.python.org
>>
>>> BG
>>
>>  A-python-convict ly
>>-- 
>>José

Any equivalent of the CGI.pm Perl module and the various gateways
towards SGBD or OLE data structures ? (a bit off the LyX thread, but...)

-- 
Jean-Pierre

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Allan Rae]

On Sun, 27 May 2001, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
[...]
[ Baruch wrote this bit ]
  The implementation as I expect it to be, will not force you to use one
  language over the other, only if you want the official scripts you'll
  need the official language. There is a need however to make the
  scripting language easy enough for as many as users as possible so that
  most of the users will not need to have multiple languages in LyX.

 That's why I'm glad that GIMP now has two scripting languages.  Scheme
 was the official one, but they added the perl module after that.  I
 admit I haven't yet learnt how to script for GIMP, but it's far more
 likely now, because I don't have to learn a whole new language as well
 as learning the GIMP-specific things needed to script GIMP.

 So as for languages that people are likely to know, you've got Lisp (for
 all those emacs-Lisp folks), and Perl, and the next New Thing, Python.
 I don't know about the knowledge-base for Scheme... and I've never heard
 of Icon.

FWIW, a number of Python folk are interested in LyX -- both for personal
use (with python.cls etc.) and as a possible unofficial documenting tool.
Their official documenting tools are a couple of scripts and any text
editor and they aren't about to change that in a hurry.  I know a couple
of people in particular who are Python gurus (one's a Python Team member)
who would love to get their hands dirty in LyX (with Python of course).

Then as a second official language we have Perl.  Maybe this would
encourage Perl mongers to test and maintain the lonely reLyX.  Or we just
let the Python gurus rewrite reLyX in Python ;-)   Python is supposed to
be faster than Perl anyway :P

Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
second language.

Allan. (ARRae)

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Allan Rae]

On Sun, 27 May 2001, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
[...]
[ Baruch wrote this bit ]
  The implementation as I expect it to be, will not force you to use one
  language over the other, only if you want the official scripts you'll
  need the official language. There is a need however to make the
  scripting language easy enough for as many as users as possible so that
  most of the users will not need to have multiple languages in LyX.

 That's why I'm glad that GIMP now has two scripting languages.  Scheme
 was the official one, but they added the perl module after that.  I
 admit I haven't yet learnt how to script for GIMP, but it's far more
 likely now, because I don't have to learn a whole new language as well
 as learning the GIMP-specific things needed to script GIMP.

 So as for languages that people are likely to know, you've got Lisp (for
 all those emacs-Lisp folks), and Perl, and the next New Thing, Python.
 I don't know about the knowledge-base for Scheme... and I've never heard
 of Icon.

FWIW, a number of Python folk are interested in LyX -- both for personal
use (with python.cls etc.) and as a possible unofficial documenting tool.
Their official documenting tools are a couple of scripts and any text
editor and they aren't about to change that in a hurry.  I know a couple
of people in particular who are Python gurus (one's a Python Team member)
who would love to get their hands dirty in LyX (with Python of course).

Then as a second official language we have Perl.  Maybe this would
encourage Perl mongers to test and maintain the lonely reLyX.  Or we just
let the Python gurus rewrite reLyX in Python ;-)   Python is supposed to
be faster than Perl anyway :P

Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
second language.

Allan. (ARRae)

Re: Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Allan Rae]

On Sun, 27 May 2001, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
[...]
[ Baruch wrote this bit ]
> > The implementation as I expect it to be, will not force you to use one
> > language over the other, only if you want the official scripts you'll
> > need the official language. There is a need however to make the
> > scripting language easy enough for as many as users as possible so that
> > most of the users will not need to have multiple languages in LyX.
>
> That's why I'm glad that GIMP now has two scripting languages.  Scheme
> was the official one, but they added the perl module after that.  I
> admit I haven't yet learnt how to script for GIMP, but it's far more
> likely now, because I don't have to learn a whole new language as well
> as learning the GIMP-specific things needed to script GIMP.
>
> So as for languages that people are likely to know, you've got Lisp (for
> all those emacs-Lisp folks), and Perl, and the next New Thing, Python.
> I don't know about the knowledge-base for Scheme... and I've never heard
> of Icon.

FWIW, a number of Python folk are interested in LyX -- both for personal
use (with python.cls etc.) and as a possible unofficial documenting tool.
Their official documenting tools are a couple of scripts and any text
editor and they aren't about to change that in a hurry.  I know a couple
of people in particular who are Python gurus (one's a Python Team member)
who would love to get their hands dirty in LyX (with Python of course).

Then as a second official language we have Perl.  Maybe this would
encourage Perl mongers to test and maintain the lonely reLyX.  Or we just
let the Python gurus rewrite reLyX in Python ;-)   Python is supposed to
be faster than Perl anyway :P

Anyway, past discussions have usually ended up with Python as best because
it's readable/writable even for newbies.  Scheme/Lisp usually dropped as a
bad idea because no-one cares to type all the ()'s and Perl as a possible
second language.

Allan. (ARRae)

Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Kathryn Andersen]

On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 07:11:51PM +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
 * George De Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010526 19:05]:
  On Wednesday 23 May 2001 11:17, Baruch Even wrote:
  
   To follow up on these comments and enthusiasm (and a developers
   discussion), what is the language of choice for such an embedded
   scripting language is from your perspective?
  
   Several options that were raised (and I rememeber) include Icon,
   Lisp, Scheme and Python.
  
  Personally, I liked the concept of implementing this to support multiple 
  languages so you could chose your own.  (Not only do people have personal 
  preferences, but they may also have existing code bases that they want or 
  need to integrate new code with.)
 
 The need is for an Official language not necessarily a single one, but
 one that is expected to be available in most installations, possibly it
 will be available out of the box from packages. This is to make it
 possible to have a library of scripts, and to allow removing things
 currently implemented in LyX into the official scripting language.
 
 The implementation as I expect it to be, will not force you to use one
 language over the other, only if you want the official scripts you'll
 need the official language. There is a need however to make the
 scripting language easy enough for as many as users as possible so that
 most of the users will not need to have multiple languages in LyX.

That's why I'm glad that GIMP now has two scripting languages.  Scheme
was the official one, but they added the perl module after that.  I
admit I haven't yet learnt how to script for GIMP, but it's far more
likely now, because I don't have to learn a whole new language as well
as learning the GIMP-specific things needed to script GIMP.

So as for languages that people are likely to know, you've got Lisp (for
all those emacs-Lisp folks), and Perl, and the next New Thing, Python.
I don't know about the knowledge-base for Scheme... and I've never heard
of Icon.

Kathryn Andersen
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Thanks to the diligence of the FBI,
this particular vaccuum cleaner will not fall into the wrong hands.
-- Howard Hughes(Rocketeer)
-- 
 _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/  \|   http://www.katspace.com
\_.--.*/|   
  v | #include standard/disclaimer.h
| Melbourne - Victoria - Australia - Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha!  |   - Earth - Sol - Milky Way Galaxy - Universe

Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Kathryn Andersen]

On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 07:11:51PM +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
 * George De Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010526 19:05]:
  On Wednesday 23 May 2001 11:17, Baruch Even wrote:
  
   To follow up on these comments and enthusiasm (and a developers
   discussion), what is the language of choice for such an embedded
   scripting language is from your perspective?
  
   Several options that were raised (and I rememeber) include Icon,
   Lisp, Scheme and Python.
  
  Personally, I liked the concept of implementing this to support multiple 
  languages so you could chose your own.  (Not only do people have personal 
  preferences, but they may also have existing code bases that they want or 
  need to integrate new code with.)
 
 The need is for an Official language not necessarily a single one, but
 one that is expected to be available in most installations, possibly it
 will be available out of the box from packages. This is to make it
 possible to have a library of scripts, and to allow removing things
 currently implemented in LyX into the official scripting language.
 
 The implementation as I expect it to be, will not force you to use one
 language over the other, only if you want the official scripts you'll
 need the official language. There is a need however to make the
 scripting language easy enough for as many as users as possible so that
 most of the users will not need to have multiple languages in LyX.

That's why I'm glad that GIMP now has two scripting languages.  Scheme
was the official one, but they added the perl module after that.  I
admit I haven't yet learnt how to script for GIMP, but it's far more
likely now, because I don't have to learn a whole new language as well
as learning the GIMP-specific things needed to script GIMP.

So as for languages that people are likely to know, you've got Lisp (for
all those emacs-Lisp folks), and Perl, and the next New Thing, Python.
I don't know about the knowledge-base for Scheme... and I've never heard
of Icon.

Kathryn Andersen
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Thanks to the diligence of the FBI,
this particular vaccuum cleaner will not fall into the wrong hands.
-- Howard Hughes(Rocketeer)
-- 
 _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/  \|   http://www.katspace.com
\_.--.*/|   
  v | #include standard/disclaimer.h
| Melbourne - Victoria - Australia - Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha!  |   - Earth - Sol - Milky Way Galaxy - Universe

Languages (was Re: sorting tables?)

[Kathryn Andersen]

On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 07:11:51PM +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
> * George De Bruin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010526 19:05]:
> > On Wednesday 23 May 2001 11:17, Baruch Even wrote:
> > 
> > > To follow up on these comments and enthusiasm (and a developers
> > > discussion), what is the language of choice for such an embedded
> > > scripting language is from your perspective?
> > >
> > > Several options that were raised (and I rememeber) include Icon,
> > > Lisp, Scheme and Python.
> > 
> > Personally, I liked the concept of implementing this to support multiple 
> > languages so you could chose your own.  (Not only do people have personal 
> > preferences, but they may also have existing code bases that they want or 
> > need to integrate new code with.)
> 
> The need is for an "Official language" not necessarily a single one, but
> one that is expected to be available in most installations, possibly it
> will be available out of the box from packages. This is to make it
> possible to have a library of scripts, and to allow removing things
> currently implemented in LyX into the official scripting language.
> 
> The implementation as I expect it to be, will not force you to use one
> language over the other, only if you want the official scripts you'll
> need the official language. There is a need however to make the
> scripting language easy enough for as many as users as possible so that
> most of the users will not need to have multiple languages in LyX.

That's why I'm glad that GIMP now has two scripting languages.  Scheme
was the official one, but they added the perl module after that.  I
admit I haven't yet learnt how to script for GIMP, but it's far more
likely now, because I don't have to learn a whole new language as well
as learning the GIMP-specific things needed to script GIMP.

So as for languages that people are likely to know, you've got Lisp (for
all those emacs-Lisp folks), and Perl, and the next New Thing, Python.
I don't know about the knowledge-base for Scheme... and I've never heard
of Icon.

Kathryn Andersen
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"Thanks to the diligence of the FBI,
this particular vaccuum cleaner will not fall into the wrong hands."
-- Howard Hughes(Rocketeer)
-- 
 _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
/  \|   
\_.--.*/|   
  v | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha!  |   -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe