Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> Yes you did: "the last second of every year" is always 23:59:59 of 31st >> December, and it is always the same time and

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> Yes you did: "the last second of every year" is always 23:59:59 of 31st >> December, and it is always the same time and

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Rick Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 5:45:36 PM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:42:23 -0800, Rick Johnson wrote: >> >> > For instance, if the age is queried many times a second, >> > it would

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Yes you did: "the last second of every year" is always 23:59:59 of 31st > December, and it is always the same time and date "every year". Except when it's 23:59:60 or 23:59:61 (which hasn't yet

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 17:18:38 -0800, Rick Johnson wrote: [...] > So, for instance: if your birthday is January 25th 1969, the last second > of the last day of your _first_ year is January 24th 1970 @ 11:59:59PM. > And the last second of the last day of your _second_ year is January > 24th 1971 @

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 17:18:38 -0800, Rick Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 5:45:36 PM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:42:23 -0800, Rick Johnson wrote: >> >> > For instance, if the age is queried many times a second, it would be >> > a much wiser design to

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 5:45:36 PM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:42:23 -0800, Rick Johnson wrote: > > > For instance, if the age is queried many times a second, > > it would be a much wiser design to set-up an event that > > will advance the age at the end of the

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:09 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:39 AM, Geldenhuys, J, Prof > wrote: >> I think your case illustrates the Python/Mathematica issue well: you found >> a job for which Mathematica was not the

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2018-02-18 22:55, Paul Rubin wrote: Steven D'Aprano writes: "positive odd integers greater than 10 but less than 15003 divisible by 17 except for 850, 867 and 1394; or primes that aren't Mersenne primes" It *could* be a type, if your type system

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2018-02-18 22:55, Paul Rubin wrote: Steven D'Aprano writes: "positive odd integers greater than 10 but less than 15003 divisible by 17 except for 850, 867 and 1394; or primes that aren't Mersenne primes" It *could* be a type, if your type system

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/20/18 3:51 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Rick Johnson wrote: On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:18:31 PM UTC-6, MRAB wrote: The point he was making is that if you store a person's age, you'd have to update it every year. It's

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 21-02-18 11:31, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 2/21/2018 3:15 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> On 21-02-18 06:18, Terry Reedy wrote: >>> On 2/20/2018 8:38 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >>> People praise the dynamic nature of Python here on this list and then often enough seem to recoil when they see a

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 12:28:29 PM UTC+1, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Marko Rauhamaa writes: > > > Many people think static typing is key to high quality. I tend to think > > the reverse is true: the boilerplate of static typing hampers > > expressivity so much that, on

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/21/2018 3:15 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: On 21-02-18 06:18, Terry Reedy wrote: On 2/20/2018 8:38 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: People praise the dynamic nature of Python here on this list and then often enough seem to recoil when they see a piece of code really using that dynamism. ... When

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 21-02-18 06:18, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 2/20/2018 8:38 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > >> People praise the dynamic nature of Python here on this list and then >> often enough seem to recoil when they see a piece of code really using >> that dynamism. > > ... > > When makes people recoil is abusing

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 21-02-18 05:13, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 10:17:12 -0700, Ian Kelly wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Steven D'Aprano >> wrote: >>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:23:44 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: >>> > Okay. Now create a

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20-02-18 16:38, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:23:44 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: > >>> Okay. Now create a constraint on a name in C++ such that it can only >>> accept integers representing A.D. years which, on the Gregorian >>> calendar, are leap years. (Using a dedicated

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/20/2018 8:38 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: People praise the dynamic nature of Python here on this list and then often enough seem to recoil when they see a piece of code really using that dynamism. Dynamic typing is the addition of run-time type information (RTTI) to data values. This

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:39 AM, Geldenhuys, J, Prof wrote: > I think your case illustrates the Python/Mathematica issue well: you found a > job for which Mathematica was not the perfect tool and you used Python. At > the end of the day, both M & P have their

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Hi Marcel, I have read through the article and it seems to me that all of the problems described boil down to one important point: use the right tool for the right job. Python is probably not the best language for developing large, complex systems (although there are such systems). Most (or

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Rick Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:51:56 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: > [...] >> Nope. Even if you need the age many times per second, it's still >> better to store the date of birth, because you eliminate

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 10:17:12 -0700, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:23:44 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> Okay. Now create a constraint on a name in C++ such that it can only

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:42:23 -0800, Rick Johnson wrote: > For instance, if the age is queried many times a second, it would be a > much wiser design to set-up an event that will advance the age at the > end of the last second of every year Do you really mean to say that everybody in the world

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 22:19:13 +0100, Christian Gollwitzer wrote: [...] > LeapYearCheck could be implemented using template metaprogramming > (quite horrible) or the new funky constexpr feature in C++11/C++14 (less > horrible). Thanks Christian. That's certainly interesting, I don't know much

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:11:05 +, Wild, Marcel, Prof wrote: > I scarcely know Python, and I have no intention delving into it further. > I was forced to use Python because it features binary decision > diagrams, which MATHEMATICA doesn't. Coming from Mathematica the >

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:51:56 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: [...] > Nope. Even if you need the age many times per second, it's still > better to store the date of birth, because you eliminate boundary > conditions and duplicated data. You failed to provide any examples proving this

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Am 20.02.18 um 14:58 schrieb Chris Angelico: Okay. Now create a constraint on a name in C++ such that it can only accept integers representing A.D. years which, on the Gregorian calendar, are leap years. (Using a dedicated integer-like type is permitted.) It must accept all multiples of four,

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Rick Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:18:31 PM UTC-6, MRAB wrote: > >> The point he was making is that if you store a person's age, you'd have >> to update it every year. It's far better to store the date of birth

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20/02/2018 20:17, MRAB wrote: On 2018-02-20 19:17, bartc wrote: On 20/02/2018 19:04, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:11:05 +, "Wild, Marcel, Prof " declaimed the following: So the special type of the values 65..90 might not allow

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 2:18:31 PM UTC-6, MRAB wrote: > The point he was making is that if you store a person's age, you'd have > to update it every year. It's far better to store the date of birth and > calculate the age on demand. *AHEM* At the risk of being labeled a "quibbler"

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2018-02-20 19:17, bartc wrote: On 20/02/2018 19:04, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:11:05 +, "Wild, Marcel, Prof " declaimed the following: So the special type of the values 65..90 might not allow the type be multiplied or divided,

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid? (Posting On Python-List Prohibited)

On 20/02/2018 19:35, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:43:41 AM UTC+13, bartc wrote: In Pascal (and presumably Ada) then all the gubbins need to make this work properly: var x: 1..10; x = 10; x = x + 1; { error? } Error on both statements. Pascal

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2018-02-20, Rhodri James wrote: > The schism is not as wide as you are implying. Aside from "print" > becoming a function, which is blindingly obvious whenever you trip over > it, there is relatively little reason why an ordinary Pythonista would > care whether he or

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20/02/2018 19:04, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:11:05 +, "Wild, Marcel, Prof " declaimed the following: So the special type of the values 65..90 might not allow the type be multiplied or divided, or added to itself. Because they

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

"Wild, Marcel, Prof " writes: > I scarcely know Python, and I have no intention delving into it > further. That's fine. This is a forum for those who do have an ongoing interest in Python. I think your needs would be better served elsewhere. -- \

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20/02/18 17:11, Wild, Marcel, Prof wrote: I scarcely know Python, and I have no intention delving into it further. I was forced to use Python because it features binary decision diagrams, which MATHEMATICA doesn't. Coming from Mathematica the account of Nathan Murphy

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

> On Feb 20, 2018, at 8:58 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:53 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> In C++ I can do something like: >> >> SomeClass MyVar; >> >> And after that the kind of possible assignments to MyVar are constraint.

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 9:40:37 AM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote: [...] > Yes you did: you refused to meet the challenge, stating (and I quote): I'm always entertained by Steven's so-called "challenges". You see, Steven is addicted to winning, and he'll do anything to win a debate, even

RE: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

I scarcely know Python, and I have no intention delving into it further. I was forced to use Python because it features binary decision diagrams, which MATHEMATICA doesn't. Coming from Mathematica the account of Nathan Murphy reads like a nightmare. The one point that stroke me the most was

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:23:44 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: > >>> Okay. Now create a constraint on a name in C++ such that it can only >>> accept integers representing A.D. years which, on the Gregorian

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 14:12:08 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > På Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:28:25 + (UTC) Steven D'Aprano > skrev: >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:34:29 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: >> >> > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:15:19 + (UTC) Steven

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:23:44 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> Okay. Now create a constraint on a name in C++ such that it can only >> accept integers representing A.D. years which, on the Gregorian >> calendar, are leap years. (Using a dedicated integer-like type is >> permitted.) It must accept

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20-02-18 14:58, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:53 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> In C++ I can do something like: >> >> SomeClass MyVar; >> >> And after that the kind of possible assignments to MyVar are constraint. It >> makes the runtime throw an error

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20-02-18 15:04, Paul Moore wrote: > On 20 February 2018 at 13:53, Antoon Pardon wrote: > >> You can't put such constraints on names in Python. > I know. That's what *I* said some time ago. So why did you bother complaining to me when I wrote it? --

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20-02-18 14:55, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:38 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> Why should this be done at compile time? I say a static language can do >> the same as a dynamic language and your counter point is to ask for how >> that static language can

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20/02/2018 13:38, Antoon Pardon wrote: People praise the dynamic nature of Python here on this list and then often enough seem to recoil when they see a piece of code really using that dynamism. Maybe everyone has their own ideas of how dynamic a language should be. (I use another

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20 February 2018 at 13:53, Antoon Pardon wrote: > You can't put such constraints on names in Python. I know. That's what *I* said some time ago. >> Sigh. Languages are different. That's my point. > > So, if languages are different, why the difficulty in accepting one

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:53 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > In C++ I can do something like: > > SomeClass MyVar; > > And after that the kind of possible assignments to MyVar are constraint. It > makes the runtime throw an error when somewhere the program tries to assign >

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:38 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > Why should this be done at compile time? I say a static language can do > the same as a dynamic language and your counter point is to ask for how > that static language can do something extra. > > The point I am making

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

I'm not proficient with C++, but IIUC, you could make a class in C++ and have the constructor and copy operator check for these kind of things. True it would be run-time checks but that would already be more than Python can give. >>> That (run-time checks) is exactly the

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20-02-18 13:24, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:18:47 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: > >> On 19-02-18 15:25, Steven D'Aprano wrote: Ones like C++ has already tied itself itself up in knots just doing the basics; I'm not sure how it would handle even my 1,3,5,7,9 type.

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20 February 2018 at 13:04, Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 20-02-18 13:11, Paul Moore wrote: >> On 20 February 2018 at 11:18, Antoon Pardon wrote: >>> Personnally I would prefer the type system of Pascal and Modula2 with >>> their interval type >>> above

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

På Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:28:25 + (UTC) Steven D'Aprano skrev: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:34:29 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > > > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:15:19 + (UTC) Steven D'Aprano > > skrev: > >> On Mon,

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20-02-18 13:11, Paul Moore wrote: > On 20 February 2018 at 11:18, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> Personnally I would prefer the type system of Pascal and Modula2 with >> their interval type >> above a Digit class in python. For the simple reason that once you had >> declared a

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20/02/2018 12:11, Paul Moore wrote: On 20 February 2018 at 11:18, Antoon Pardon wrote: There is no such possibility in Python. You can off course start with x = Digit(5), but the language won't stop you from doing x = 11 later. I'm not proficient with C++, but

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:34:29 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:15:19 + (UTC) Steven D'Aprano > skrev: >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:06:36 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: >> >> > Array is not even close to providing a strongly

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:18:47 +0100, Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 19-02-18 15:25, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >>> Ones like C++ has already tied itself itself up in knots just doing >>> the basics; I'm not sure how it would handle even my 1,3,5,7,9 type. >>> >>> But Python has classes and can do some

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 20 February 2018 at 11:18, Antoon Pardon wrote: > Personnally I would prefer the type system of Pascal and Modula2 with > their interval type > above a Digit class in python. For the simple reason that once you had > declared a variable > like this: > x: 1 .. 10; > >

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 19-02-18 15:25, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> Ones like C++ has already tied itself itself up in knots just doing the >> basics; I'm not sure how it would handle even my 1,3,5,7,9 type. >> >> But Python has classes and can do some of this stuff; how would it >> handle a numeric type that is

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/20/18 5:47 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: On 19-02-18 16:18, Ned Batchelder wrote: On 2/19/18 9:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:28:26 +, Paul Moore wrote: [1] The most basic question, which people making such claims often can't answer, is "Do you mean that values are

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 19-02-18 16:18, Ned Batchelder wrote: > On 2/19/18 9:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:28:26 +, Paul Moore wrote: >> >>> [1] The most basic question, which people making such claims often >>> can't >>> answer, is "Do you mean that values are strongly typed, or that

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 02:35:37 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > But C is a language saddled with so much history and backward > compatibility constraints that there are some things you just CAN'T make > into errors Indeed. C is not even close to a safe language, hence the move to create (and more

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Monday, February 19, 2018 at 1:07:02 PM UTC, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:39:31 + (UTC) > Steven D'Aprano skrev: > > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:26:32 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > > > > > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:47:14 +1100 > > > Tim Delaney skrev: > > >> On 18

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 12:58:49 AM UTC-6, Paul Rubin wrote: [...] > Beyond that, the Python community (with some exceptions) seems to have a > widespread hatred of threads. It instead prefers to handle concurrent > i/o with in-thread async schemes that the rest of the world left behind

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 10:25:32 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: [...] > This is often touted as a necessity for industrial-grade > software. It isn't. There are many things that a type > system, no matter how sophisticated, cannot catch; for some > reason, though, we don't hear people

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/19/18 10:35 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:34 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 20:14:32 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: As an integer, 3.141590 is 107853 $ Looks to me like C is perfectly happy to interpret a

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/19/18 1:01 PM, Paul Moore wrote: On 19 February 2018 at 17:11, Ned Batchelder wrote: On 2/19/18 10:39 AM, Paul Moore wrote: I'm curious - How would you explain Python's "variables" to someone who knows how C variables work, in a way that ensures they don't carry

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 19 February 2018 at 17:11, Ned Batchelder wrote: > On 2/19/18 10:39 AM, Paul Moore wrote: >> >> I'm curious - How would you explain Python's "variables" to someone >> who knows how C variables work, in a way that ensures they don't carry >> across any unfortunate

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/19/18 10:39 AM, Paul Moore wrote: On 19 February 2018 at 15:18, Ned Batchelder wrote: On 2/19/18 9:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:28:26 +, Paul Moore wrote: [1] The most basic question, which people making such claims often can't

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Paul Moore : > I'm curious - How would you explain Python's "variables" to someone > who knows how C variables work, in a way that ensures they don't carry > across any unfortunate misconceptions based on how C works? Just say that 1. Every Python variable is of the type

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 11:35 PM, bartc wrote: > Sometimes, the reason for creating a special numerical type is precisely so > you can't do arithmetic on them, if it's not meaningful for the type. > > So the special type of the values 65..90 might not allow the type be >

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 19 February 2018 at 15:18, Ned Batchelder wrote: > On 2/19/18 9:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:28:26 +, Paul Moore wrote: >> >>> [1] The most basic question, which people making such claims often can't >>> answer, is "Do you mean that

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:34 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 20:14:32 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> As an integer, 3.141590 is 107853 $ >> >> Looks to me like C is perfectly happy to interpret a float as an int. > > Yes, but that's

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:15:19 + (UTC) Steven D'Aprano skrev: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:06:36 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > > > Array is not even close to providing a strongly typed container. > > That's a mighty powerful claim that goes against

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Ned Batchelder : > I guess I'll have to continue to grit my teeth as people say, "Python > doesn't have variables."   Why can't we say, "Python's variables work > differently than other languages"? Because they don't? Marko --

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/19/18 9:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:28:26 +, Paul Moore wrote: [1] The most basic question, which people making such claims often can't answer, is "Do you mean that values are strongly typed, or that names are? Or did you mean that variables are, because if so

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:06:36 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > Array is not even close to providing a strongly typed container. That's a mighty powerful claim that goes against the documentation for the array module. Can you back your claims up? Here's an array and a list: import array arr

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:28:26 +, Paul Moore wrote: > [1] The most basic question, which people making such claims often can't > answer, is "Do you mean that values are strongly typed, or that names > are? Or did you mean that variables are, because if so Python doesn't > even have variables in

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:35:19 +, bartc wrote: > Type systems get rapidly very complicated when you have to deal with > arbitrary sets of values and with arbitrary rules of interaction. > Someone has to devise a programming language to allow all that without > tying itself up in knots. Someone

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:19:14 +0100, Alain Ketterlin wrote: > Steven D'Aprano writes: > >> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:40:09 +0100, Alain Ketterlin wrote: >> >>> Tim Delaney writes: >>> >>> [...] As others have said, typing is

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 20:14:32 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > As an integer, 3.141590 is 107853 $ > > Looks to me like C is perfectly happy to interpret a float as an int. Yes, but that's not an *automatic* coercion. To count as weakly typed, the compiler has to do it automatically, without

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 19 February 2018 at 13:06, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > Python isn't particular strong typed. In fact, apart from asking an object > what type it is, types are not that important. It's the interface that > matters. I wonder why this is a sore point for Python developers?

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:39:31 + (UTC) Steven D'Aprano skrev: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:26:32 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > > > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:47:14 +1100 > > Tim Delaney skrev: > >> On 18 February 2018 at

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 19/02/2018 02:59, Chris Angelico wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 1:14 PM, bartc wrote: How would even a type for the odd numbers from 1 to 10 inclusive work? (That, a type consisting of one of the values in {1,3,5,7,9}.) Would they be ordered or unordered? Can I do

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Alain Ketterlin : > Your claim essentially is: since we cannot prove everything, let's not > even try to prove anything. Go on if you think this is the right way to > think about typing. This discussion is far too metaphysical. Static type declarations

[OT] multicore/cpu history Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Adriaan Renting| Email: rent...@astron.nl Software Engineer Radio Observatory ASTRON | Phone: +31 521 595 100 (797 direct) P.O. Box 2 | GSM: +31 6 24 25 17 28 NL-7990 AA Dwingeloo | FAX: +31 521 595 101 The Netherlands| Web:

Re: [OT] multicore/cpu history Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 10:39 PM, Adriaan Renting wrote: > I remember running 2 Mendocino 300 MHz Celerons on a Pentium II Xeon > motherboard to get a > multi-cpu machine for running multiple virtual machines for testing > purposes around 1998. > This was not as Intel intended,

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Steven D'Aprano writes: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:40:09 +0100, Alain Ketterlin wrote: > >> Tim Delaney writes: >> >> [...] >>> As others have said, typing is about how the underlying memory is >>> treated. >> >> No. It is much

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 9:24 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:40:09 +0100, Alain Ketterlin wrote: > >> Tim Delaney writes: >> >> [...] >>> As others have said, typing is about how the underlying memory is >>>

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Chris Angelico writes: > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 9:04 PM, Alain Ketterlin > wrote: >> Look at the C11 standard, section 6.3.2.3 ("Pointers"), 6.5.§6-7 >> ("effective types"), and 6.5.3.2 ("Address and indirection operators"). >> It

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:40:09 +0100, Alain Ketterlin wrote: > Tim Delaney writes: > > [...] >> As others have said, typing is about how the underlying memory is >> treated. > > No. It is much more than that. Typing is about everything you can say > about a given

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 9:04 PM, Alain Ketterlin wrote: > Chris Angelico writes: > >> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Alain Ketterlin >> wrote: > >>> No. C has much stronger rules, not on

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 8:36 PM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 17-02-18 21:11, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: You'd be surprised

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Chris Angelico writes: > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Alain Ketterlin > wrote: >> No. C has much stronger rules, not on casting, but on accessing the >> pointees, which basically invalidates your argument. Refer to the C >>

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 2/19/2018 4:14 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Alain Ketterlin wrote: Tim Delaney writes: C is statically and weakly typed. Variables know their types at compile time (static typing). It is

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On 17-02-18 21:11, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Ian Kelly wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> You'd be surprised how rarely that kind of performance even matters. >>> The author of that article

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Alain Ketterlin wrote: > Tim Delaney writes: >> C is statically and weakly typed. Variables know their types at compile >> time (static typing). It is a feature of the language that you can

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

Tim Delaney writes: [...] > As others have said, typing is about how the underlying memory is treated. No. It is much more than that. Typing is about everything you can say about a given statement. Some type systems are focusing on type labels only (like most

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:26:32 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:47:14 +1100 > Tim Delaney skrev: >> On 18 February 2018 at 22:55, Anders Wegge Keller >> wrote: > > >> > That list is not only weakly typed, but rather

Re: Are the critiques in "All the things I hate about Python" valid?

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 02:14:26 +, bartc wrote: > On 19/02/2018 00:09, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> Sure, but only the most boring, uninteresting kinds of types can be so >> named. The point is that "sufficiently fine-grained types" can be >> arbitrarily complex. > > I don't think so. That's

  1   2   >