On 19/02/2021 18:14, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
>> and cons. LISP only had cons.
:-)
LOL
--
Alan G
Author of the Learn to Program web site
http://www.alan-g.me.uk/
http://www.amazon.com/author/alan_gauld
Follow my photo-blog on Flickr at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alangauldphotos
--
, it is a plus or
minus depending.
(cons "A" (cons "v" (cons "I" nil)))
-Original Message-
From: Python-list On
Behalf Of Benjamin Schollnick
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 1:31 PM
To: Michael F. Stemper
Cc: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: New Python i
>> that method was borrowed from or vice versa. Being a rich language has pro's
>> and cons. LISP only had cons.
Now, Now. That’s certainly not correct.
LISP does have a few Pros. Namely Job security. You’ll have a hard time
replacing a experienced and professional LISP programmer.
On 19/02/2021 10.49, Avi Gross wrote:
But for an individual programmer, it is great to use whichever method feels
best for you, and especially if you came to python from another language
that method was borrowed from or vice versa. Being a rich language has pro's
and cons. LISP only had cons.
On 2021-02-19, Avi Gross via Python-list wrote:
> Some of us here go way back and have stories to tell of what we did even
> before Python existed. I won't rehash my history here now except to say I
> did use PASCAL in graduate school and my first job before switching to C
> which was less
On 2021-02-19, Alan Gauld via Python-list wrote:
> On 19/02/2021 03:51, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
>> They chose Pascal as being more modern, and something taught in
>> schools (yeah, like TurboPascal is going to be a good introduction
>> to writing software for real-time ground control of
Subject: Re: New Python implementation
On 19/02/2021 03:51, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> They chose Pascal as being more modern, and something taught in
> schools (yeah, like TurboPascal is going to be a good introduction to
> writing software for real-time ground control of s
On 19/02/2021 03:51, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> They chose Pascal as being more modern, and something taught in schools
> (yeah, like TurboPascal is going to be a good introduction to writing
> software for real-time ground control of satellites).
Funnily enough it was. Or at least for
the modules that make hard things easy.
>
> Just a thought. Admittedly it is hard these days to give a homework
> assignment when the student can find a trivial way to get the result and not
> do the hard work.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Python-list On
>
1 12:45 AM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: New Python implementation
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:03:33 +, Alan Gauld via Python-list
declaimed the following:
>On 16/02/2021 07:35, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
>> Am 16.02.21 um 06:36 schrieb dn:
>>> Pascal's value as a teaching l
On 16/02/2021 21:22, Tarjei Bærland via Python-list wrote:
> To me, it depends on what you want out of including programming in
> mathematics education.
That's a really important subclass distinction.
If programming is seen as an adjunct to math then the aims
can be simplified considerably since
On 16/02/2021 22:23, boB Stepp wrote:
>> And that's just one example, the language is now full of meta goodness
>> that makes it incomprehensible to beginners.
>
> Hmm. I'm not sure I can agree, Alan. My son took to Python 3 like a duck to
> water.
That's interesting. I knew you were
Greetings,
age: After university to retirement
level: school, A Level is high school, not university
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021, 8:15 PM Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
wrote:
> Greetings list,
>
> > Even if Python is my choice language for personal projects, I am not
> certain it
> is the right language to use in a classroom context.
>
> This sums the view of most teachers in my country. In here for
Greetings list,
> Even if Python is my choice language for personal projects, I am not
certain it
is the right language to use in a classroom context.
This sums the view of most teachers in my country. In here for A level
at Cambridge for Computer Studies you can choose either Java, or VB or
On 2021-02-14 00:52:43 +, Alan Gauld via Python-list wrote:
> On 14/02/2021 00:07, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > The neos Python implementation will not be dealing
> > with Python byte code in any form whatsoever.
>
> Ok but what do you do with the disassembler module?
What do PyPy, Jython,
Christian Gollwitzer schreef op 16/02/2021 om 8:25:
Am 15.02.21 um 21:37 schrieb Roel Schroeven:
So your claim is that your compiler is able to, or will be able to,
compile any language just by specifying a small schema file. Great!
Do you maybe have a proof-of-concept? A simple language with
On 21/02/16 11:03AM, Alan Gauld wrote:
Python v1 was a good teaching language. v2 complicated it a bit
but it was still usable. v3 is no longer a good teaching language
(unless maybe you are teaching CompSci at university.)
[...]
And that's just one example, the language is now full of meta
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 1:23 PM Tarjei Bærland via Python-list <
python-list@python.org> wrote:
> Sure, Brainfuck is two steps too far, but Scheme or Logo I'd wager be
> excellent languages to get the students into computational
> thinking. Haskell might be a good choice as well, I do not have
Christian Gollwitzer writes:
> I agree to all the rest of your post, but this:
>
> Am 16.02.21 um 09:57 schrieb Tarjei Bærland:
>> I am not sure I agree that a language like Scheme or Logo or Brainfuck, with
>> their small number of building blocks, would be harder to learn.
>
>
> is strange.
David Lowry-Duda writes:
>> In Norway, where I try to teach mathematics to highschoolers,
>> programming has recently entered the teaching of stem subjects.
>>
>> Even if Python is my choice language for personal projects, I am not
>> certain it is the right language to use in a classroom
On 2/16/21 10:58 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Attempts at a universal compiler stalled in the 1980s (though there may
> have been some new developments since I stopped looking) because
> expressing the semantics of different languages is so very hard. In
> fact, much of the interest in pursuing the
I agree to all the rest of your post, but this:
Am 16.02.21 um 09:57 schrieb Tarjei Bærland:
I am not sure I agree that a language like Scheme or Logo or Brainfuck, with
their small number of building blocks, would be harder to learn.
is strange. I'm not sure, have you actually looked at
"Avi Gross" writes:
> Thanks for sharing. I took a look and he does have a few schemas for Ada and
> C from TWO YEARS ago. Nothing about the infinite number of other languages
> he plans on supporting, let alone Python. And what he has is likely not
> enough to do what he claims he can do easily
sage-
From: Python-list On
Behalf Of Christian Gollwitzer
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 2:25 AM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: New Python implementation
Am 15.02.21 um 21:37 schrieb Roel Schroeven:
>
> So your claim is that your compiler is able to, or will be able to,
> co
On 16/02/2021 07:35, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Am 16.02.21 um 06:36 schrieb dn:
>> Pascal's value as a teaching language was that it embodied many aspects
>> of structured programming, and like Python, consisted of a limited range
>> of items which could be learned very quickly
>
> ROFL.
> In Norway, where I try to teach mathematics to highschoolers,
> programming has recently entered the teaching of stem subjects.
>
> Even if Python is my choice language for personal projects, I am not
> certain it is the right language to use in a classroom context.
> ...
> I am not sure I
Christian Gollwitzer writes:
> Am 16.02.21 um 06:36 schrieb dn:
>> Pascal's value as a teaching language was that it embodied many aspects
>> of structured programming, and like Python, consisted of a limited range
>> of items which could be learned very quickly (in contrast to PL/I's many
>>
Am 16.02.21 um 06:36 schrieb dn:
Pascal's value as a teaching language was that it embodied many aspects
of structured programming, and like Python, consisted of a limited range
of items which could be learned very quickly (in contrast to PL/I's many
'bells and whistles').
ROFL. Maybe that
Am 15.02.21 um 21:37 schrieb Roel Schroeven:
So your claim is that your compiler is able to, or will be able to,
compile any language just by specifying a small schema file. Great!
Do you maybe have a proof-of-concept? A simple language with a simple
schema file to test the basic workings
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 9:37 PM dn via Python-list
wrote:
> On 16/02/2021 17.57, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 8:52 PM Igor Korot wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, guys,
> >> Let me try to throw in another one - PL/1.
> >> This guys used to be very popular with the accounting community...
On 16/02/2021 17.57, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 8:52 PM Igor Korot wrote:
>
>> Hi, guys,
>> Let me try to throw in another one - PL/1.
>> This guys used to be very popular with the accounting community...
>>
>
> Actually PL/I is basically proprietary Pascal - from IBM.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 8:52 PM Igor Korot wrote:
> Hi, guys,
> Let me try to throw in another one - PL/1.
> This guys used to be very popular with the accounting community...
>
Actually PL/I is basically proprietary Pascal - from IBM. My Intro Comp
Sci classes at the University of Cincinnati
Hi, guys,
Let me try to throw in another one - PL/1.
This guys used to be very popular with the accounting community...
Thank you.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 9:51 PM Alan Gauld via Python-list
wrote:
>
> On 15/02/2021 22:24, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> > Grant Edwards schreef op 15/02/2021 om 21:59:
>
On 15/02/2021 22:24, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> Grant Edwards schreef op 15/02/2021 om 21:59:
>> On 2021-02-15, Roel Schroeven wrote:
>>
>>> Is it your intention to not only compile procedural and object-oriented
>>> languages, or also functional languages such as Haskell, Ocaml, Scheme?
>>
>> And
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 3:25 PM Grant Edwards
wrote:
> On 2021-02-15, Avi Gross via Python-list wrote:
> Of all the languages I've used, Prolog was by far the hardest to get
> my head around. The dialect I used the most (which still wasn't much)
> was part of Digitalk's Smalltalk system. I
On 2021-02-15, Avi Gross via Python-list wrote:
> Haven't thought about Prolog in a LOOONG time but it had some wild
> twists on how to specify a problem that might not be trivial to
> integrate with other languages as our now seemingly censored person
> with much delusion of grandeur suggests.
Grant Edwards schreef op 15/02/2021 om 21:59:
On 2021-02-15, Roel Schroeven wrote:
Is it your intention to not only compile procedural and object-oriented
languages, or also functional languages such as Haskell, Ocaml, Scheme?
And Prolog!
Ha, yes, that one was the next one I thought
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 1:49 PM dn via Python-list
wrote:
> When I first met it, one of the concepts I found difficult to 'wrap my
> head around' was the idea that "open software" allowed folk to fork the
> original work and 'do their own thing'. My thinking was (probably)
> "surely, the
nce groups.
-Original Message-
From: Python-list On
Behalf Of Grant Edwards
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 4:00 PM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: New Python implementation
On 2021-02-15, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> Is it your intention to not only compile procedural and
>
And C.
Thank you.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021, 3:56 PM Grant Edwards
wrote:
> On 2021-02-15, Roel Schroeven wrote:
>
> > Is it your intention to not only compile procedural and object-oriented
> > languages, or also functional languages such as Haskell, Ocaml, Scheme?
>
> And Prolog!
>
> --
> Grant
On 2021-02-15, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> Is it your intention to not only compile procedural and object-oriented
> languages, or also functional languages such as Haskell, Ocaml, Scheme?
And Prolog!
--
Grant
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Mr Flibble schreef op 15/02/2021 om 0:32:
On 14/02/2021 23:00, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
I'm not saying that it is unfeasible or very difficult. I'm saying that it is a lot of work, and for a single
developer who has this as a side project / support for his graphics engine and who wants to
After reading the thread i'm like: where can i try it out ...
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, 16:38 Mr Flibble,
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch
> using "neos" my universal compiler that can compile any programming
> language. I envision this
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 3:05 PM Christian Gollwitzer
wrote:
> Am 14.02.21 um 11:12 schrieb Paul Rubin:
> > Christian Gollwitzer writes:
> >> He wants that neoGFX is scriptable in Python, but instead of linking
> >> with CPython, he will write his own Python implementation instead,
> >> because
On 14/02/2021 23:00, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
Am 14.02.21 um 11:12 schrieb Paul Rubin:
Christian Gollwitzer writes:
He wants that neoGFX is scriptable in Python, but instead of linking
with CPython, he will write his own Python implementation instead,
because CPython is slow/not clean/
Am 14.02.21 um 11:12 schrieb Paul Rubin:
Christian Gollwitzer writes:
He wants that neoGFX is scriptable in Python, but instead of linking
with CPython, he will write his own Python implementation instead,
because CPython is slow/not clean/ whatever. He doesn't seem to
understand that this is
Of course not.
Its like saying "JAVA sucks" without any citation or proof.
And I'm just curious - why not use C directly, since he is so great
developer for whatever task he needs to do?
Fun time reading... Hope it will continue.
Thank you.
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021, 1:22 AM Christian Gollwitzer
Am 14.02.21 um 01:19 schrieb Chris Angelico:
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
Hi,
But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
I mean - what problems the actual python compiler produce?
Thank you.
I am creating neos as I
On 14/02/2021 03:26, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2021-02-14, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On Saturday, February 13, 2021 at 7:19:58 PM UTC-5, Chris Angelico wrote:
At the absolute least, show that you have something that can run Python code.
The OP has been making these claims on IRC for a (at least
On 14/02/2021 00:52, Alan Gauld wrote:
On 14/02/2021 00:07, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 13/02/2021 18:11, Alan Gauld wrote:
You are going to create a Python compiler that will take existing
Python code and output a byte code file.
No neos is not a Python compiler: it is a *universal* compiler
On 14/02/2021 00:07, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On 13/02/2021 18:11, Alan Gauld wrote:
>> You are going to create a Python compiler that will take existing
>> Python code and output a byte code file.
>
> No neos is not a Python compiler: it is a *universal* compiler that
> can compile any programming
On 2021-02-14, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On Saturday, February 13, 2021 at 7:19:58 PM UTC-5, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> At the absolute least, show that you have something that can run Python
>> code.
>
> The OP has been making these claims on IRC for a (at least two
> years). He has never cared
On 14/02/2021 02:54, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On Sunday, February 14, 2021 at 2:18:03 AM UTC, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 14/02/2021 00:51, Ned Batchelder wrote:
The OP has been making these claims on IRC for a while (at least two years). He
has never cared to substantiate them, or even participate
On 14/02/2021 03:35, Paul Rubin wrote:
Mr Flibble writes:
I am creating neos as I need a performant scripting engine for my
other major project "neoGFX" and I want to be able to support multiple
popular scripting languages including Python.
Is something wrong with Guile for that purpose? If
On 14/02/2021 00:51, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On Saturday, February 13, 2021 at 7:19:58 PM UTC-5, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
Hi,
But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
I mean - what problems the
On 14/02/2021 00:19, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
Hi,
But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
I mean - what problems the actual python compiler produce?
Thank you.
I am creating neos as I need
On Saturday, February 13, 2021 at 7:19:58 PM UTC-5, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Mr Flibble
> wrote:
> >
> > On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
> > > I mean - what problems the actual python
scussion.
-Original Message-
From: Python-list On
Behalf Of Mr Flibble
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2021 7:07 PM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: New Python implementation
On 13/02/2021 18:11, Alan Gauld wrote:
> On 13/02/2021 16:09, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On 13/02/2021 00:0
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:14 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
>
> On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
> > Hi,
> > But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
> > I mean - what problems the actual python compiler produce?
> >
> > Thank you.
>
> I am creating neos as I need a performant scripting
On 13/02/2021 23:30, Igor Korot wrote:
Hi,
But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
I mean - what problems the actual python compiler produce?
Thank you.
I am creating neos as I need a performant scripting engine for my other major project
"neoGFX" and I want to be able to
On 13/02/2021 18:11, Alan Gauld wrote:
On 13/02/2021 16:09, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 13/02/2021 00:01, Alan Gauld wrote:
I'm assuming it's a new executable interpreter that can run any
valid python code. Is that correct?
It is a universal *compiler* so it compiles the python code to byte code
Hi,
But most importantly - what is the reason for this ?
I mean - what problems the actual python compiler produce?
Thank you.
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021, 3:26 PM Alan Gauld via Python-list <
python-list@python.org> wrote:
> On 13/02/2021 16:09, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On 13/02/2021 00:01, Alan Gauld
On 13/02/2021 16:09, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On 13/02/2021 00:01, Alan Gauld wrote:
>> I'm assuming it's a new executable interpreter that can run any
>> valid python code. Is that correct?
>
> It is a universal *compiler* so it compiles the python code to byte code
> and then optionally to machine
On 2/12/2021 4:42 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 12/02/2021 02:45, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 2/11/2021 5:33 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 11/02/2021 22:25, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:00 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 11/02/2021 21:13, Dan Stromberg wrote:
Does your project have a name yet?
On 13/02/2021 00:01, Alan Gauld wrote:
On 12/02/2021 21:46, Mr Flibble wrote:
The neos Python implementation will consist of a schema file
which describes the language plus any Python-specific semantic concepts
So the schema file is some kind of formal grammar definition of
the language?
On 12/02/2021 21:46, Mr Flibble wrote:
> The neos Python implementation will consist of a schema file
> which describes the language plus any Python-specific semantic concepts
So the schema file is some kind of formal grammar definition of
the language?
And you "compile" this directly into
On 12/02/2021 00:15, Alan Gauld wrote:
On 11/02/2021 12:30, Mr Flibble wrote:
I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation
from scratch using "neos" my universal compiler that can
compile any programming language.
Can i clarify that?
Are you saying that you are going to
On 12/02/2021 02:45, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 2/11/2021 5:33 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 11/02/2021 22:25, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:00 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 11/02/2021 21:13, Dan Stromberg wrote:
Does your project have a name yet? I'd like to follow it through google
On 2/11/2021 5:33 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On 11/02/2021 22:25, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:00 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 11/02/2021 21:13, Dan Stromberg wrote:
Does your project have a name yet? I'd like to follow it through
google
alerts or an announcement mailing list.
On 11/02/2021 12:30, Mr Flibble wrote:
> I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation
> from scratch using "neos" my universal compiler that can
> compile any programming language.
Can i clarify that?
Are you saying that you are going to recompile the existing
C code for pyhton
On 11/02/2021 23:05, Paul Rubin wrote:
Mr Flibble writes:
"neos" - https://neos.dev/ https://github.com/i42output/neos
Good luck, let us know when it is done. What is there doesn't look like
a credible start so far, but maybe you will surprise us. Have you
actually written any code in the
On 11/02/2021 23:12, Greg Ewing wrote:
On 12/02/21 11:33 am, Mr Flibble wrote:
neos isn't a Python package so that isn't a problem.
It might be a bit confusing if it ever becomes part of the
wider Python ecosystem, though.
Python is but one language that neos will implement.
/Flibble
--
On 12/02/21 11:33 am, Mr Flibble wrote:
neos isn't a Python package so that isn't a problem.
It might be a bit confusing if it ever becomes part of the
wider Python ecosystem, though.
--
Greg
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 11/02/2021 22:25, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:00 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 11/02/2021 21:13, Dan Stromberg wrote:
Does your project have a name yet? I'd like to follow it through google
alerts or an announcement mailing list.
"neos" - https://neos.dev/
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:00 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
> On 11/02/2021 21:13, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > Does your project have a name yet? I'd like to follow it through google
> > alerts or an announcement mailing list.
>
> "neos" - https://neos.dev/ https://github.com/i42output/neos
>
Pypi already
, February 11, 2021 1:15 PM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: New Python implementation
On 11/02/2021 18:06, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 5:01 AM Mr Flibble
> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/02/2021 16:31, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 4:35 AM
On 11/02/2021 21:13, Dan Stromberg wrote:
Does your project have a name yet? I'd like to follow it through google
alerts or an announcement mailing list.
"neos" - https://neos.dev/ https://github.com/i42output/neos
/Flibble
--
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:21 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
> For a language to transition from "toy" status it has to be formally
> standardized. It is unacceptable to define a language in terms of a
> particular implementation. A git repo of Source code and associated
> observable dynamic behaviour
On 12/02/2021 08.53, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 6:47 AM dn via Python-list
> wrote:
>> 3
>> My mind is whirling in an attempt to understand "show me a better time".
>> Does this perhaps indicate that @Chris' social life leaves something to
>> be desired? Are Python-nerds
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 6:47 AM dn via Python-list
wrote:
> 3
> My mind is whirling in an attempt to understand "show me a better time".
> Does this perhaps indicate that @Chris' social life leaves something to
> be desired? Are Python-nerds really the ones to turn-to for dating
> advice, or is
On 12/02/2021 07.14, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On 11/02/2021 18:06, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 5:01 AM Mr Flibble
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/02/2021 16:31, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 4:35 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
> I am starting work on creating
On 11/02/2021 18:24, Paul Bryan wrote:
On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:56 +, Mr Flibble wrote:
Actually it is a relatively small task due to the neos universal
compiler's architectural design. If it was a large task I wouldn't
be doing it.
When do you estimate this task will be completed?
I
On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 17:56 +, Mr Flibble wrote:
> Actually it is a relatively small task due to the neos universal
> compiler's architectural design. If it was a large task I wouldn't
> be doing it.
When do you estimate this task will be completed?
> I am not particularly interested in
On 11/02/2021 18:06, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 5:01 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
On 11/02/2021 16:31, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 4:35 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
Hi!
I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch
using "neos" my universal
On 11/02/2021 18:03, Chris Angelico wrote:
In any case, it's not Python if it can't handle arbitrarily large
numbers. Python is an excellent language for mathematics.
I am also creating Ada and Haskell implementations which have a similar
requirement.
/Flibble
--
--
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 5:01 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
>
> On 11/02/2021 16:31, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 4:35 AM Mr Flibble
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch
> >> using "neos" my universal compiler
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 4:52 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
>
> On 11/02/2021 15:13, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:36 PM Mr Flibble
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch
> >> using "neos" my universal
On 11/02/2021 16:31, Dan Stromberg wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 4:35 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
Hi!
I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch
using "neos" my universal compiler that can compile any programming
language. I envision this implementation to be
On 11/02/2021 15:13, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:36 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
Hi!
I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch using
"neos" my universal compiler that can compile any programming language.
Is it your intention to support all of
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 4:35 AM Mr Flibble
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch
> using "neos" my universal compiler that can compile any programming
> language. I envision this implementation to be significantly faster than
> the currently
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:36 PM Mr Flibble
wrote:
>
>
> Hi!
>
> I am starting work on creating a new Python implementation from scratch using
> "neos" my universal compiler that can compile any programming language.
Is it your intention to support all of Python's syntax and semantics,
or is
92 matches
Mail list logo
