Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
Martin P. Hellwig martin.hell...@dcuktec.org wrote: Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it doesn't make it suddenly right. This is no good. It's a well known fact that anything I tell you three times is true. To demonstrate: Tim Rowe's post earlier in this thread was the funniest one in a long time. Tim Rowe's post earlier in this thread was the funniest one in a long time. Tim Rowe's post earlier in this thread was the funniest one in a long time. see - it's true! - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
On 23 Jan., 08:13, Philip Semanchuk phi...@semanchuk.com wrote: On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kay Schluehr wrote: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. Is this a variant of Godwin's Law for Python? Definitely. It's a stable fixed point attractor. No matter how often it was discussed to dead in the past months the likelihood that someone mentions the GIL or ref-counting approaches 1. This is particularly remarkable because it is inverse proportional to the observable activity in this domain so there are really no news. Other similarly strange phenomena: whenever Xah Lee posts one of his infamous rants it attracts at least a dozen of newsgroup readers that try to persuade each other not to respond which will inevitably grow his thread and keep it alive for a long time. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we need to remove reference counting and the GIL. -- Tim Rowe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Tim Rowe digi...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we need to remove reference counting and the GIL. But that would be hard and require a major rewrite. ;) BTW, he said sufficiently sophisticated topic. Since there hasn't been an extremely long post here yet, I don't know if this counts. -- Tim Rowe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
I dub it Schluehr's law. On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 21:39 -0800, Kay Schluehr wrote: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
2009/1/23 Benjamin Kaplan benjamin.kap...@case.edu: BTW, he said sufficiently sophisticated topic. Since there hasn't been an extremely long post here yet, I don't know if this counts. Had I waited until the thread became long enough, somebody else would have already raised the issue -- you must surely know about Schluehr's Law? ;-) -- Tim Rowe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
Tim Rowe wrote: 2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we need to remove reference counting and the GIL. Perhaps, but you could also say that if it was that widely discussed and still not changed that it was for a *good* reason, perhaps the reason may change over time but at this moment it is still a good reason. Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it doesn't make it suddenly right. -- mph -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
Tim Rowe wrote: 2009/1/23 Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. Well, maybe, but it seems to me that the real issue here is that we need to remove reference counting and the GIL. Guido will give up reference counting and the consequent immediate gc when but only when *someone* presents an implementation that does and and that runs faster. Given the current ferment in dynamic language implementation, he just today wrote on pydev list CPython's implementation strategy *will* evolve. Whether that means R.C. goes away or not remains to be seen. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
2009/1/23 Martin P. Hellwig martin.hell...@dcuktec.org: Or you can argue that even when an argument is repeated indefinitely it doesn't make it suddenly right. No, but it makes for a confirmation of Schluehr's law :-) -- Tim Rowe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Kay Schluehr kay.schlu...@gmx.net wrote: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. +1 QOTW - Chris -- Follow the path of the Iguana... http://rebertia.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The First Law Of comp.lang.python Dynamics
On Jan 23, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kay Schluehr wrote: Whatever sufficiently sophisticated topic was the initially discussed it ends all up in a request for removing reference counting and the GIL. Is this a variant of Godwin's Law for Python? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
