Antoon Pardon writes:
> Op 30-09-13 20:55, Piet van Oostrum schreef:
>> Franck Ditter writes:
>>
>>> Good approach of FP in Python, but two points make me crazy :
>>> 1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
>>> technology (since 1960).
>>> And don't answer with "
On 2013-10-01, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 18:36:28 +, Neil Cerutti quoted:
>
>> Why can??t lambda forms contain statements?
>
> Gah! Please fix your news client! (I see you're using slrn.)
> The \x92 bytes found in your message are apostrophes
> (technically: right single
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:36 AM, rusi wrote:
>> (But I do sometimes yearn for a goto.)
>
> Ha! In Scheme, a tail call IS a goto with parameter re-assignment
Precisely. In fact, tail call optimization basically consists of that
exact rewrite. I'm absolutely fine with it being completely explicit.
On Tuesday, October 1, 2013 6:11:18 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:04:32 +0200, Franck Ditter wrote:
> > 2. Lambda-expression body is limited to one expression. Why ?
>
> Nobody has come up with syntax that is unambiguous, would allow multiple
> statements in an expr
On 1/10/2013 3:04 AM, Franck Ditter wrote:
1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
technology (since 1960).
And don't answer with "good programmers don't use recursion", this is bullshit.
Here's an article Guido wrote explaining his reasoning:
http://neopythonic
On 9/30/2013 5:02 PM, Tim Chase wrote:
On 2013-09-30 19:04, Franck Ditter wrote:
two points make me crazy :
1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is
known technology (since 1960). And don't answer with "good
programmers don't use recursion",
I seem to recall hearing th
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:04:32 +0200, Franck Ditter wrote:
> Good approach of FP in Python, but two points make me crazy : 1. Tail
> recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
> technology (since 1960). And don't answer with "good programmers don't
> use recursion", this is bull
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 18:36:28 +, Neil Cerutti quoted:
> Why cant lambda forms contain statements?
Gah! Please fix your news client! (I see you're using slrn.) The \x92
bytes found in your message are apostrophes (technically: right single
quotation marks), encoded using the legacy Windo
On 2013-09-30 19:04, Franck Ditter wrote:
> two points make me crazy :
> 1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is
> known technology (since 1960). And don't answer with "good
> programmers don't use recursion",
I seem to recall hearing that the primary reason it hadn't bee
Op 30-09-13 20:55, Piet van Oostrum schreef:
Franck Ditter writes:
Good approach of FP in Python, but two points make me crazy :
1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
technology (since 1960).
And don't answer with "good programmers don't use recursion", this
Op 30-09-13 19:04, Franck Ditter schreef:
Good approach of FP in Python, but two points make me crazy :
1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
technology (since 1960).
And don't answer with "good programmers don't use recursion", this is bullshit.
Guido doesn
Franck Ditter writes:
> Good approach of FP in Python, but two points make me crazy :
> 1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
> technology (since 1960).
> And don't answer with "good programmers don't use recursion", this is
> bullshit.
Tail recursion optimiza
On 2013-09-30, Franck Ditter wrote:
> In article ,
> rusi wrote:
>> I touched upon these in two blog-posts:
>> 1. http://blog.languager.org/2013/06/functional-programming-invades.html
>> 2. http://blog.languager.org/2012/10/functional-programming-lost-booty.html
>>
>> Also most programmers with
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Franck Ditter wrote:
> 1. Tail recursion is not optimized. We are in 2013, why ? This is known
> technology (since 1960).
> And don't answer with "good programmers don't use recursion", this is
> bullshit.
I've yet to see any value in having the compiler/interpre
In article ,
rusi wrote:
> Combining your two questions -- Recently:
> What minimum should a person know before saying "I know Python"
>
> And earlier this
> On Sunday, August 4, 2013 10:00:35 PM UTC+5:30, Aseem Bansal wrote:
> > If there is an issue in place for improving the lambda forms then
On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:56:21 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:07 AM, rusi wrote:
> > And this is an old conundrum in programming language design:
> >
> > In C printf is easy to write and NOT put into the language but into
> > external libraries
>
> > In Pa
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:07 AM, rusi wrote:
> And this is an old conundrum in programming language design:
>
> In C printf is easy to write and NOT put into the language but into external
> libraries
> In Pascal, writeln cannot be outside the language because as a user defined
> function, its t
On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:21:19 PM UTC+5:30, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
> Would the type system get in the way of providing some analogous
> function in Haskell? I don't know.
Yes.
The haskell curry
curry f x y = f (x,y)
is really only curry2
curry3 would be
curry3 f x y z = f (x,y,z)
and so
rusi writes:
> On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 1:12:51 PM UTC+5:30, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
> > rusi writes:
> >
> > > Without resorting to lambdas/new-functions:
> > > With functools.partial one can freeze any subset of a
> > > function(callable's) parameters.
> >
> > > In Haskell one can onl
On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 1:12:51 PM UTC+5:30, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
> rusi writes:
>
> > Without resorting to lambdas/new-functions:
> > With functools.partial one can freeze any subset of a
> > function(callable's) parameters.
> >
>
> > In Haskell one can only freeze the first parame
rusi writes:
> Without resorting to lambdas/new-functions:
> With functools.partial one can freeze any subset of a
> function(callable's) parameters.
>
> In Haskell one can only freeze the first parameter or at most with
> a right section the second
You have an f of type A -> B -> C -> D -> E
On Monday, September 23, 2013 11:54:53 PM UTC+5:30, Vito De Tullio wrote:
> rusi wrote:
>
> > [Not everything said there is correct; eg python supports currying better
> > [than haskell which is surprising considering that Haskell's surname is
> > [Curry!]
>
>
> AFAIK python does not support cur
Vito De Tullio writes:
> rusi wrote:
>
> > [Not everything said there is correct; eg python supports currying
> > better [than haskell which is surprising considering that
> > Haskell's surname is [Curry!]
>
> AFAIK python does not support currying at all (if not via some
> decorators or somethi
rusi wrote:
> [Not everything said there is correct; eg python supports currying better
> [than haskell which is surprising considering that Haskell's surname is
> [Curry!]
AFAIK python does not support currying at all (if not via some decorators or
something like that).
Instead every function
24 matches
Mail list logo
