documenting formal operational semantics of Python

[gideon]

Hi Everybody,

In the context of a master's thesis I'm currently looking into
Python's operational semantics. Even after extensive searching on the
web, I have not found any formal model of Python. Therefore I am
considering to write one myself. To make a more informed decision, I
would like to ask you:

What previous work has been done that I should be aware of? Currently
I have found exactly nothing on python itself. There is some
interesting work on other, related languages like Smalltalk.

Which version of Python is the most interesting? Python 3.0, although
it would be a moving target, seems promising. Because it will simplify
the language in some aspects by ditching backwards compatibility (e.g.
old style classes and coercion), the semantics will be more clean.

Of course I will get, answers to many questions I did not ask. In
fact, I would like you to vent your opinions on this matter.

Thanks!
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

An executable operational semantics for Python

[gideon]

Hi everybody,

I've recently finished my Master's thesis on the semantics of Python.
In my thesis I define the semantics of Python by rewriting an abstract
machine. The sources that are used to produce my thesis can also be
compiled into a working interpreter. Hence I call it an 'executable'
semantics.

Anyone interested should have a look at the short intro I put on my
web page:
http://gideon.smdng.nl/2009/01/an-executable-operational-semantics-for-python/

--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: An executable operational semantics for Python

[gideon]

On Feb 12, 5:14 pm, bearophileh...@lycos.com wrote:
> gideon:
>
> > I've recently finished my Master's thesis on the semantics of Python.
> > In my thesis I define the semantics of Python by rewriting an abstract
> > machine. The sources that are used to produce my thesis can also be
> > compiled into a working interpreter. Hence I call it an 'executable'
> >semantics.
>
> Can it be used for some useful purpose?

The interpreter? Probably not. The semantics. Yes.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

nohup and os.system

[Gideon]

I've got a python script, batch.py that, amongst other things,
executes commands:

os.system('cmd1')
os.system('cmd2')

now, these programs output certain information at the command line,
and if i execute

./batch.py

it shows up as I would expect.

However, if i run

nohup ./batch.py &

then while everything runs, but the intermediate output that generated
by each os.system call does not get appended to nohup.out until
*after* the command finishes executing.  Is there a way I can get this
data to be appended in real time?

What I'm doing in practice is sticking a lightweight python script
around an existing fortran binary, and I'd like to be able to monitor
the progress of the binary be checking the nohup.out log.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list