On 3/16/11 11:05 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Stefan Behnelstefan...@behnel.de wrote:
I'm actually leaning towards not guaranteeing the order of execution if C
doesn't do it either. If this is really required, it's easy to work around
for users, but it's severely
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Jason Grout
jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
On 3/16/11 11:05 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Stefan Behnelstefan...@behnel.de
wrote:
I'm actually leaning towards not guaranteeing the order of execution if C
doesn't do it
2011/3/17 Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Jason Grout
jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
On 3/16/11 11:05 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Stefan Behnelstefan...@behnel.de
wrote:
I'm actually leaning towards not
Robert Bradshaw, 11.03.2011 19:33:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Stefan Behnelstefan...@behnel.de wrote:
Stefan Behnel, 11.03.2011 15:08:
Vitja Makarov, 11.03.2011 15:04:
2011/3/11 Stefan Behnel:
Personally, I think it would be nice to keep up Python's semantics, but
when
I
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
Robert Bradshaw, 11.03.2011 19:33:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Stefan Behnelstefan...@behnel.de
wrote:
Stefan Behnel, 11.03.2011 15:08:
Vitja Makarov, 11.03.2011 15:04:
2011/3/11 Stefan Behnel:
Personally,
Stefan Behnel wrote:
This introduces problems when the arguments have side effects or are not
simple, e.g.
f(g(a), a.x, h(a))
What do you think about this?
I think it's a bad idea to write code that relies on the order
of evaluation like this. If the order matters, it's better to
be
Stefan Behnel wrote:
To be a little clearer here, it's a problem in C for example with struct
values. Copying them by value into a temp variable can be expensive,
potentially twice as expensive as simply passing them into the function
normally.
What are you actually proposing to do here?
