Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], James
Mills wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Object orientation IS procedural.
Correction: OOP is Imperative.
No, procedural.
Nope, imperative !-)
The functional unit is
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], James
Mills wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Object orientation IS procedural.
Correction: OOP is Imperative.
No, procedural.
The functional unit is called an expression, the encapsulation of which is
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Aaron Castironpi Brady wrote:
I understand that formal proof systems, as well as automated
theorem provers, have been difficult to develop.
The basic problem is: having proved that a program satisfies certain
formally-specified criteria, how do you prove that
Tim Rowe a écrit :
2008/9/26 Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Not to start a troll, but from what I've seen of C# so far I do find this a
bit surprising and really suspect more of a library issue than a language
one. Care to tell more about the problem and solution ?
(NB : I wouldn't
2008/9/28 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Before I tried wxFormBuilder, I imagined that C# would be vastly
faster to develop than Python, for anything requiring any non-trivial
graphical interface. I've done extensive VB, so I can attest to that
personally. It is not.
I'm
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:00:59 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Patrick Mullen a écrit :
Depending on the scale of the website I am making, how much I care
about editing it in the future,
On Sep 28, 4:41 pm, Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/9/28 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Before I tried wxFormBuilder, I imagined that C# would be vastly
faster to develop than Python, for anything requiring any non-trivial
graphical interface. I've done extensive VB, so
2008/9/27 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No way. It's *zero* instead of one, if so, because the only thing C#
has is a bunch of handcuffs and implicit 'self'. You have a line
like:
You don't follow what I said, and from your tone I get the feeling you
don't *want* to follow what
On Sep 27, 6:55 pm, Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/9/27 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No way. It's *zero* instead of one, if so, because the only thing C#
has is a bunch of handcuffs and implicit 'self'. You have a line
like:
You don't follow what I said, and from
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Aaron Castironpi Brady wrote:
Wikipedia puts it decently: mainly for OO programming, but with some
procedural elements.
Procedural is the opposite of functional, not object-oriented.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Aaron Castironpi Brady wrote:
Wikipedia puts it decently: mainly for OO programming, but with some
procedural elements.
Procedural is the opposite of functional, not object-oriented.
AFAIK, the opposite if functional is
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:58:39 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Procedural is the opposite of functional, not object-oriented.
AFAIK, the opposite if functional is imperative, not procedural. But
let's not waste too much time on terminology arguments...
We're not wasting time on terminology
Hi,
Tim Rowe wrote:
2008/9/23 Craig Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So python may turn out to be pure OO
...
The question I usually ask is Does this language help me get the job
done? Python often does. That's all that really matters, isn't it?
Well then it still depends on the perception of
Depending on the scale of the website I am making, how much I care
about editing it in the future, and how much I just want to get
something up, I will occasionally use php. And I am a self confessed
php hater :) But it's generally the fastest way I know to get
something up. So even terrible
Patrick Mullen a écrit :
Depending on the scale of the website I am making, how much I care
about editing it in the future, and how much I just want to get
something up, I will occasionally use php. And I am a self confessed
php hater :) But it's generally the fastest way I know to get
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:00:59 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Patrick Mullen a écrit :
Depending on the scale of the website I am making, how much I care
about editing it in the future, and how much I just want to get
something up, I will occasionally use php. And I am a self confessed
php
2008/9/26 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The question I usually ask is Does this language help me get the job
done? Python often does. That's all that really matters, isn't it?
Well then it still depends on the perception of job done. For example
PHP programmers would bet their soul that
On Sep 26, 11:48 am, Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/9/26 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The question I usually ask is Does this language help me get the job
done? Python often does. That's all that really matters, isn't it?
Well then it still depends on the perception of job
Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:58:39 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Procedural is the opposite of functional, not object-oriented.
AFAIK, the opposite if functional is imperative, not procedural. But
let's not waste too much time on terminology arguments...
We're not
Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:00:59 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Patrick Mullen a écrit :
Depending on the scale of the website I am making, how much I care
about editing it in the future, and how much I just want to get
something up, I will occasionally use php. And
Tim Rowe a écrit :
2008/9/26 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The question I usually ask is Does this language help me get the job
done? Python often does. That's all that really matters, isn't it?
Well then it still depends on the perception of job done. For example
PHP programmers would
On Sep 26, 11:48 am, Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/9/26 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The question I usually ask is Does this language help me get the job
done? Python often does. That's all that really matters, isn't it?
Well then it still depends on the perception of job
2008/9/26 Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Not to start a troll, but from what I've seen of C# so far I do find this a
bit surprising and really suspect more of a library issue than a language
one. Care to tell more about the problem and solution ?
(NB : I wouldn't even asked if you
2008/9/26 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If you have wxFormBuilder and the win32 library, it's pretty fast.
Speed has never been an issue for me with Python. For my masters
degree I did a project that involved a lot of number crunching, and in
my proposal I wrote that I'd use Python
On Sep 26, 6:40 pm, Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/9/26 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If you have wxFormBuilder and the win32 library, it's pretty fast.
Speed has never been an issue for me with Python. For my masters
degree I did a project that involved a lot of number
2008/9/27 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But I, and I imagine I'm not the only one, would love to know the
example that C# developed faster than Python. I suppose the fact that
the line of wx specification that has two identifiers where C# has one
is more of a drain on programmer
On Sep 26, 8:10 pm, Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/9/27 Aaron Castironpi Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
But I, and I imagine I'm not the only one, would love to know the
example that C# developed faster than Python. I suppose the fact that
the line of wx specification that has two
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Craig
Allen wrote:
It is clearly possible to write procedural code... that is,
Python does not force object oriented syntax or concepts on you ...
Object orientation IS procedural.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], candide wrote:
... Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
language.
Python allows you to use OO-style constructs, but doesn't force you to have
inheritance and subclasses if you don't want to. Duck typing is usually a
much more
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Object orientation IS procedural.
Correction: OOP is Imperative.
--JamesMills
--
--
-- Problems are solved by method
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
2008/9/23 Craig Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So python may turn out to be pure OO
I think that's the sort of thing the pedants would hang that hats on,
too. Python isn't *pure* OO, in that it lets the programmers do non-OO
if they want to, but it is *fully* OO in that it includes everything
if they want to, but it is *fully* OO in that it includes everything
required to do OO. But maybe the original blogger meant by fully OO
what I mean by Pure OO?
it seems to me this is what was meant... pure OO, AND forced to use
it.
My personal feeling is that python is multiparadigmed
Kay Schluehr wrote:
On 20 Sep., 23:07, Aaron \Castironpi\ Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sep 20, 3:22 pm, Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20 Sep., 18:33, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following definitions are AFAIK the only commonly accepted
definitions
It is clear to me that Python is a multiparadigmed object oriented
language. It is clearly possible to write procedural code... that is,
Python does not force object oriented syntax or concepts on you and
insist you define everything in such a structure. Is the OO it allows
full OO, I think so,
Hi!
Everything ... are an object.
It's true ; but a language built around the objects, and OOP, are two
different concepts.
@-salutations
--
Michel Claveau
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Bonjour !
AMHA, ceux qui ont écrit ce texte ont une mauvaise idée de ce que sont
les variables en Python.
Ils ont sans doute trop en tête les notions des variables en C ou en
Basic, et ne se sont pas penchés sur les spécificités de Python.
@-salutations
--
Michel Claveau
--
Christian Heimes wrote:
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Actually it is simply wrong in the mentioned case
[...]
It's not wrong. You have found a simple optimization. Lot's of compilers
for lots of languages optimize code by code folding.
I don't think he meant that Python is wrong somehow, but that
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I don't think he meant that Python is wrong somehow, but that the OO
babble of what happens for 2+2 is wrong. The babble said that, when the
code is executed, an __add__ message is sent to the 2 object, with
another 2 object as the parameter. That statement is incorrect:
Excerpt quoted from http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html :
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
language.
Thanks for any comment.
--
This is wrong. Python _is_ a full OOP language.
Everything form modules, functions to basic data types are an object.
--JamesMills
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 7:23 PM, candide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excerpt quoted from http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html :
About Python: Python is
On 20 Sep., 11:23, candide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excerpt quoted fromhttp://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html:
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Answer: if you want to define an entity it has to be defined inside a
class. If you want to access an entity you have to use the dot
operator. Therefore Java is OO but Python is not.
you're satirising the quoted author's cargo-cultish view of object
orientation, right?
On Sep 20, 2:23 am, candide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excerpt quoted fromhttp://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html:
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
candide wrote:
Excerpt quoted from http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html :
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
language.
Thanks for any comment.
Colin J. Williams wrote:
foreach: for x in array: statements
Loops over the array given by array. On each iteration, the value of the
current element is assigned to x and the internal array pointer is
advanced by one.
This could be a useful addition to Python.
for-in could be a useful
for-in could be a useful addition to Python? looks like Guido's used
his time machine again, then, since it's been around since the pre-1.0
days:
http://www.python.org/doc/ref/for.html
He somehow must have misinterpreted
http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html
which has the
candide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excerpt quoted from http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html :
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
language.
Thanks
On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:13:08 +, Duncan Booth wrote:
This is a good indication that the
author doesn't know much about OOP.
I think you can drop the last two words :)
Actually that's unfair -- it looks like he knows quite a bit about the
metallicity of quasers, but he's just parroting a
On 20 Sep., 12:14, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Answer: if you want to define an entity it has to be defined inside a
class. If you want to access an entity you have to use the dot
operator. Therefore Java is OO but Python is not.
you're satirising the quoted
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20 Sep., 12:14, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Answer: if you want to define an entity it has to be defined inside a
class. If you want to access an entity you have to use the dot
On Sep 20, 5:23 am, candide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excerpt quoted fromhttp://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html:
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Colin J. Williams wrote:
foreach: for x in array: statements
Loops over the array given by array. On each iteration, the value of
the current element is assigned to x and the internal array pointer is
advanced by one.
This could be a useful addition to Python.
On Sep 20, 5:14 am, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Answer: if you want to define an entity it has to be defined inside a
class. If you want to access an entity you have to use the dot
operator. Therefore Java is OO but Python is not.
you're satirising the
On 20 Sep, 19:42, Aaron \Castironpi\ Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Wikipedia puts it decently: mainly for OO programming, but with some
procedural elements.
ducks
When it comes to Python and object-oriented programming, you can't
leave out the ducks. ;-)
Paul
--
candide a écrit :
Excerpt quoted from http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html :
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
Python supports OOP and classes to an extent, but is not a full OOP
language.
Thanks for any comment.
On 20 Sep., 18:33, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following definitions are AFAIK the only commonly accepted
definitions about OO:
1/ an object is defined by identity, state and behaviour
2/ objects interacts by sending messages each other
3/ an OO program is made of
On Sep 20, 3:22 pm, Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20 Sep., 18:33, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following definitions are AFAIK the only commonly accepted
definitions about OO:
1/ an object is defined by identity, state and behaviour
2/ objects interacts
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Actually it is simply wrong in the mentioned case and here is the
proof:
def foo():
return 2+2
import dis
dis.dis(foo)
2 0 LOAD_CONST 2 (4)
3 RETURN_VALUE
OO is a heuristic method used to understand the semantics of a
On Sep 20, 8:06 pm, Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kay Schluehr wrote:
Actually it is simply wrong in the mentioned case and here is the
proof:
def foo():
return 2+2
import dis
dis.dis(foo)
2 0 LOAD_CONST 2 (4)
3
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Thomas G. Willis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 20, 5:23=A0am, candide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excerpt quoted fromhttp://www.astro.ufl.edu/~warner/prog/python.html:
About Python: Python is a high level scripting language with object
oriented features.
(...)
On 20 Sep., 23:07, Aaron \Castironpi\ Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sep 20, 3:22 pm, Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20 Sep., 18:33, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following definitions are AFAIK the only commonly accepted
definitions about OO:
1/
61 matches
Mail list logo
