On 2009-11-13, at 23:20, Robert Brown wrote, quoting me:
On 2009-11-13, at 17:42, Robert Brown wrote, quoting me:
... Python *the language* is specified in a way that
makes executing Python programs quickly very very difficult.
That is untrue. I have mentioned before that optional
On 2009-11-13, at 23:39, Robert Brown wrote, quoting me:
Common Lisp blends together features of previous Lisps, which were designed to
be executed efficiently. Operating systems were written in these variants.
Execution speed was important. The Common Lisp standardization committee
included
On 2009-11-14, at 00:22, Alf P. Steinbach wrote, in response to my earlier post.
Anyways, it's a good example of focusing on irrelevant and meaningless
precision plus at the same time utilizing imprecision, higgedly-piggedly as
it suits one's argument. Mixing hard precise logic with
On 2009-11-14, at 01:11, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
OK, now we've reached a total breakdown in communication, Alf. You appear
to take exception to distinguishing between a language and its
implementation.
Not at all.
But that doesn't mean that making that distinction is always meaningful.
This whole thread has now proceeded to bore me senseless. I'm going to respond
once with a restatement of what I originally said. Then I'm going to drop it,
and
never respond to the thread again. Much of what's below has been said by others
as well; I'm taking no credit for it, just trying to
On 2009-11-13, at 12:46, Brian J Mingus wrote:
You're joking, right? Try purchasing a computer manufactured in this
millennium. Monitors are much wider than 72 characters nowadays, old timer.
I have already agreed to make my postings VT100-friendly. Oh, wait, the VT-100,
or at least some
On 2009-11-13, at 15:32, Paul Rubin wrote:
This is Usenet so
please stick with Usenet practices.
Er, this is NOT Usenet.
1. I haven't, to the best of my recollection, made a Usenet post in this
millennium.
2. I haven't fired up a copy of rn or any other news reader in at least 2
On 2009-11-13, at 17:42, Robert Brown wrote, quoting me:
... Python *the language* is specified in a way that
makes executing Python programs quickly very very difficult.
That is untrue. I have mentioned before that optional declarations integrate
well with dynamic languages. Apart from CL
On 2009-11-13, at 18:02, Robert Brown wrote:
Common Lisp and Scheme were designed by people who wanted to write complicated
systems on machines with a tiny fraction of the horsepower of current
workstations. They were carefully designed to be compiled efficiently, which
is not the case with
On 2009-11-13, at 19:53, Paul Rubin wrote:
Robert P. J. Day rpj...@crashcourse.ca writes:
http://groups.google.com/group/unladen-swallow/browse_thread/thread/4edbc406f544643e?pli=1
thoughts?
I'd bet it's not just about multicore scaling and general efficiency,
but also the suitability of
On 2009-11-13, at 22:51, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
It's sort of hilarious. g
It really is, see below.
So no, it's not a language that is slow, it's of course only concrete
implementations that may have slowness flavoring. And no, not really, they
don't, because it's just particular aspects
When I was approximately 5, everybody knew that higher level languages were too
slow for high-speed numeric computation (I actually didn't know that then, I
was too busy watching Bill and Ben the Flowerpot Men), and therefore assembly
languages were mandatory. Then IBM developed Fortran, and
On 2009-11-12, at 11:36, AK Eric wrote:
On Nov 12, 11:31 am, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
One reaction to url: url:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/ProgrammingBookP3 has been that turtle
graphics may be off-putting to some readers because it is associated
with
On 2009-11-12, at 23:19, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:20:11 -0800, Vincent Manis wrote:
Vincent, could you please fix your mail client, or news client, so
that it follows the standard for mail and news (that is, it has a
hard-break after 68 or 72 characters?
My apologies
On 2009-11-11, at 14:31, Alain Ketterlin wrote:
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu writes:
I can imagine a day when code compiled from Python is routinely
time-competitive with hand-written C.
Have a look at
On 2009-11-11, at 21:27, Mensanator wrote:
Go doesn't support inheritance, so C++ is pretty much out. C
is a lot closer, but still not all that close.
OK, if that's the case (I haven't read the Go documents), then Go is nothing
like Python, no matter how many or few semicolons there are in Go
On 2009-11-10, at 07:46, Grant Edwards wrote:
MacOS applications made the same mistake on the 68K. They
reserved the high-end bits
At the time the 32-bit Macs were about to come on the market, I saw an internal
confidential document that estimated that at least over 80% of the applications
On 2009-11-10, at 19:07, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:05:01 -0800, Vincent Manis wrote:
That is incorrect. The original Inside Mac Volume 1 (published in 1985)
didn't look anything like a phone book. The original Macintosh's CPU (the
Motorola 68000) already used 32-bit
On 2009-11-10, at 22:07, Vincent Manis wrote:
On 2009-11-10, at 19:07, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
In fact, in Inside Mac Vol II, Apple explicitly gives the format of
pointers: the low-order three bytes are the address, the high-order byte
is used for flags: bit 7 was the lock bit, bit 6
New submission from Vincent Manis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When attempting to build the LaTeX for the documentation provided with
Python 3.0b1, the following error is produced while writing the Library
documentation (full backtrace provided). I am running Sphinx on Python
2.5.
Traceback (most
Changes by Vincent Manis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
assignee: georg.brandl
components: Documentation tools (Sphinx)
nosy: georg.brandl, vmanis1
severity: normal
status: open
title: Incorrect LaTeX generated (Python 2.6a1)
type: behavior
versions: Python 2.6
New submission from Vincent Manis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The LaTeX code generated by Sphinx in 2.6a1 is incorrect. Some, but not
all, of the \end{Verbatim}'s come at the ends of lines, rather than on
lines of their own. Here is an example, at line 435 of reference.tex.
return r
Vincent Manis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
On 2008 Mar 19, at 01:00, Georg Brandl wrote:
Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thanks, fixed in r61617.
Wow, that was fast :-) -- v
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org
23 matches
Mail list logo
