Thanks!
Mike Meyer wrote: > John Salerno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [Wants to learn C# and Python simultaneously.] > >>So my question is, is this feasible? > > > Should be. It might be faster to do them sequentually. > > >>Or does learning Python require (or entail) learning all the details >>behind it? > > > Not really. There are some traps you can fall into that are obvious if > you know how the underlying implementation works, but even for those, > you just need the general idea, not the details. > > >>Also, do I need to know anything about C or C++? > > > No. In fact, the less you know about them, the less you'll have to > unlearn to use Python effectively. > > >>Python seems to connected to those languages that I'm afraid >>learning Python by itself might not be practical, but hopefully >>that's unfounded. > > > CPython (the implementation most people mean when they say "Python") > is written in C, and has well-defined APIs for putting an interpreter > into a C program, or making functionality from a C library available > to a CPython program. Other implementations have similar hooks for > different languages. Unless you want to get into the internals of an > implementation, to embed Python in an application, or to write a > Python extension (usually because you're wrapping an existing > library), you won't need to worry about any of these. > > One thing. While Python is called a "scripting language", it doesn't > have facilities for dealing with shell scripting that other "scripting > languages" have. As such, it's harder to do shell scripting type > things in Python than in those languages. On the other hand, it's > easier than doing them in C, for the same reason that doing pretty > much anything in Python is easier than doing it in C. On the gripping > hand, if you do things pythonically instead of like you'd do them in a > shell script, you may find that Python is easier than the shell > script. > > <mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
