On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 19:38:03 -0500, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 00:09:40 + (UTC), Steven D'Aprano
> declaimed the following:
>
>
>>Or more realistically, suppose you want your type system to ensure that
>>you don't lay off the wrong workers:
>>
>>"employee records where t
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 untyped. There are no
> > safeguards in the language, that enforce that all elements in a list or
> > other container are in fact
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 1:14 PM, 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.
>
> If a hum
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.
If a human finds it hard to give it a meaningful
name, no algorithm wil
Richard Damon writes:
> Doesn't sound like the sort of thing that you should expect a Type
> Checker to find.
Yes, exactly. This point is evidently ignored by people who moan that
Python, though it has strong types, is prone to bugs because it has
dynamic binding.
As Steven points out, and you
On 2/18/18 8:16 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
Dennis Lee Bieber writes:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 00:09:40 + (UTC), Steven D'Aprano
declaimed the following:
Or more realistically, suppose you want your type system to ensure
that you don't lay off the wrong workers:
"employee records where the length
Dennis Lee Bieber writes:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 00:09:40 + (UTC), Steven D'Aprano
> declaimed the following:
>
> >Or more realistically, suppose you want your type system to ensure
> >that you don't lay off the wrong workers:
> >
> >"employee records where the length of employment is greater
On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 08:02:10 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
[...]
>> The usual response to that is to make ever-finer-grained types, until
>> the type-system can prove the code is correct.
>>
>> integers
>> positive integers
>> positive integers greater than 10
>> positive integers greater than 10 b
On 18 February 2018 at 22:55, Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
> På Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:05:34 +1100
> Ben Finney skrev:
> > boB Stepp writes:
>
>
> > He blithely conflates “weakly typed” (Python objects are not weakly, but
> > very strongly typed)
>
> Python is more strongly typed than PHP, but that
On 2018-02-18 15:44, Michael Torrie wrote:
On 02/18/2018 05:45 AM, Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
På Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:34:03 -0500
Richard Damon skrev:
Python is much stronger typed than PHP, because in PHP you can do things
like 1 + '2' and get 3, as string values will naturally convert
thems
On 2018-02-18 11:55, Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
På Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:05:34 +1100
Ben Finney skrev:
boB Stepp writes:
He blithely conflates “weakly typed” (Python objects are not weakly, but
very strongly typed)
Python is more strongly typed than PHP, but that doesn't really say much
On 02/18/2018 05:45 AM, Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
> På Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:34:03 -0500
> Richard Damon skrev:
>
>> Python is much stronger typed than PHP, because in PHP you can do things
>> like 1 + '2' and get 3, as string values will naturally convert
>> themselves to numbers, Python won't
have the impression he is not a python coder
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ
On 17 Feb 2018 07:22, "boB Stepp" wrote:
> This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
> Tesla. The article is found at:
> https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-t
På Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:34:03 -0500
Richard Damon skrev:
> Python is much stronger typed than PHP, because in PHP you can do things
> like 1 + '2' and get 3, as string values will naturally convert
> themselves to numbers, Python won't do this. Yes Python will freely
> convert between numeric t
On 2/18/18 6:55 AM, Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
På Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:05:34 +1100
Ben Finney skrev:
boB Stepp writes:
He blithely conflates “weakly typed” (Python objects are not weakly, but
very strongly typed)
Python is more strongly typed than PHP, but that doesn't really say much.
Ho
On 2/18/18 6:57 AM, bartc wrote:
On 18/02/2018 11:45, Ned Batchelder wrote:
Let's not go down this path yet again. We've heard it all before.
Bart: stop it. Everyone else: stop it. :)
Well, this was a rare instance of someone admitting that a simple and
smaller codebase has benefits in bein
På Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:05:34 +1100
Ben Finney skrev:
> boB Stepp writes:
> He blithely conflates “weakly typed” (Python objects are not weakly, but
> very strongly typed)
Python is more strongly typed than PHP, but that doesn't really say much.
However, compared to a language like C, there a
On 18/02/2018 11:45, Ned Batchelder wrote:
Let's not go down this path yet again. We've heard it all before. Bart:
stop it. Everyone else: stop it. :)
Well, this was a rare instance of someone admitting that a simple and
smaller codebase has benefits in being able to detect problems such as
On 2/18/18 6:33 AM, bartc wrote:
On 18/02/2018 01:39, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:31 PM, bartc wrote:
On 18/02/2018 00:45, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:13 AM, bartc wrote:
It's text, but it is an intermediate or "object" file. It's not doing
poin
On 18/02/2018 01:39, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:31 PM, bartc wrote:
On 18/02/2018 00:45, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:13 AM, bartc wrote:
It's text, but it is an intermediate or "object" file. It's not doing
pointless stuff; it's coping with the
On 02/17/2018 06:31 PM, bartc wrote:
> It could well do all that. But it surely cannot need 18,000 lines' worth
> to do it; that much should be obvious to anyone. And in fact, for
> building with MS's Visual Studio, it doesn't use that file at all, but
> something smaller. (Although the MS build
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:31 PM, bartc wrote:
> On 18/02/2018 00:45, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:13 AM, bartc wrote:
>
>
>> It's text, but it is an intermediate or "object" file. It's not doing
>> pointless stuff; it's coping with the myriad platforms and variants
>> t
On 18/02/2018 00:45, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:13 AM, bartc wrote:
It's text, but it is an intermediate or "object" file. It's not doing
pointless stuff; it's coping with the myriad platforms and variants
that Python has support for.
It could well do all that. But it
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:13 AM, bartc wrote:
> On 17/02/2018 22:09, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 8:50 AM, bartc wrote:
>
>
>>> That's a very interesting observation.
>>>
>>> I've frequently made the complaint about systems that I consider large
>>> and
>>> complex also le
On 17/02/2018 22:09, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 8:50 AM, bartc wrote:
That's a very interesting observation.
I've frequently made the complaint about systems that I consider large and
complex also leading to such issues, where no one individual can see the
whole picture.
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 8:50 AM, bartc wrote:
> On 17/02/2018 20:11, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
>
>>> Okay, I'm curious. How did C# force you to make extra HTTP requests
>>> that were no longer necessary when you rewrote in Python?
>>
>>
>> It
On 17/02/2018 20:11, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
Okay, I'm curious. How did C# force you to make extra HTTP requests
that were no longer necessary when you rewrote in Python?
It didn't *force* those requests to be made, but the code was so large
a
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 5:05 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:25:15 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> 1) Type safety.
>>
>> 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, c
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 cites C# as a superior language, but in the
>> rewrite from C# to Python (the same one I
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:25:15 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> 1) Type safety.
>
> 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;
The usual response to that is to make ever-finer-
On 17/02/18 09:29, Gregory Ewing wrote:
boB Stepp wrote:
"Python is viewed as a ubiquitous programming language; however, its
design limits its potential as a reliable and high performance systems
language. Unfortunately, not every developer is aware of its
limitations."
"The Toyota Corolla is
On 17/02/2018 14:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
And ironically, in a *modern* statically typed language, you may not even
need the type declarations. After all, in a modern type-checker, the
compiler can infer that since foo returns 'hello world', it must return a
string; it can probably even infer
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 cites C# as a superior language, but in the
> rewrite from C# to Python (the same one I mentioned in the other
> post), I sped the program up i
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 03:29:49 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote:
> His dreadful strawperson code snippet should not be allowed even in a
> beginning programming class, let alone in professional programs.
>
> def foo(x):
> if is_valid(x):
> return "hello world"
> else:
> return b
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:28 PM, 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 the net, quality suffers.
>
> I don't fin
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 the net, quality suffers.
I don't find that with Haskell. It's statically typed but the types are
almo
Gregory Ewing :
> boB Stepp wrote:
>> "Python is viewed as a ubiquitous programming language; however, its
>> design limits its potential as a reliable and high performance
>> systems language. Unfortunately, not every developer is aware of its
>> limitations."
>
> "The Toyota Corolla is viewed as
boB Stepp wrote:
"Python is viewed as a ubiquitous programming language; however, its
design limits its potential as a reliable and high performance systems
language. Unfortunately, not every developer is aware of its
limitations."
"The Toyota Corolla is viewed as a ubiquitous family car; howev
On 2/16/2018 10:22 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
Tesla. The article is found at:
https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
To add to what other have said:
Here is what the author said about word
Am 17.02.18 um 05:54 schrieb boB Stepp:
And this is one I
am still puzzling over: Are statically-typed languages inherently
"safer" than properly implemented dynamically-typed languages? I can
see the advantages of catching type errors at compile time versus run
time.
If you haven't tried s
Am 17.02.18 um 06:12 schrieb Stefan Ram:
Chris Angelico quotes:
Python is relatively slow compared to programming languages that
run closer to the operating system. The run time of the countdown
example above is orders of magnitude faster when implemented
in other language runtimes.
What s
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 12:54 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 5:25 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
>>
>> I am curious as to what efforts have been attempted to remove the GIL
>> and what tradeoffs resulted and why? Is there a single article
>> somewhere that collates this information?
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 5:25 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
> I've just reread everyone's replies and one point you mentioned about
> the GIL caught my eye ...
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:16 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> Asynchronicity and concurrency are hard. Getting your head around a
>> program tha
I've just reread everyone's replies and one point you mentioned about
the GIL caught my eye ...
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:16 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Asynchronicity and concurrency are hard. Getting your head around a
> program that is simultaneously doing two things is inherently tricky.
>
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 4:11 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>>
>> 1) Type safety.
>>
>> This is often touted as a necessity for industrial-grade software. It
>> isn't...
>
> Chris, would you mind expanding on this point? What is necessary for
> i
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 3:54 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Ben Finney
> wrote:
>
>> He blithely conflates “weakly typed” (Python objects are not weakly, but
>> very strongly typed) with “dynamically typed” (yes, Python's name
>> binding is dynamically typed). Those are
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> 1) Type safety.
>
> This is often touted as a necessity for industrial-grade software. It
> isn't...
Chris, would you mind expanding on this point? What is necessary for
industrial-grade, safe, robust software? Do statically-typed
lan
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> Python is really good for gluing together high-performance but user- and
> programmer-hostile scientific libraries written in C and Fortran. You
> wouldn't write a serious, industrial-strength neural network in pure
> Python code and expect
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> He blithely conflates “weakly typed” (Python objects are not weakly, but
> very strongly typed) with “dynamically typed” (yes, Python's name
> binding is dynamically typed). Those are two, orthognal dimensions to
> describe a language.
>
> All
On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:22:48 -0600, boB Stepp wrote:
> This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
> Tesla. The article is found at:
> https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-
python-5c5ff5fda95e
>
> Apparently he chose his article title as "click ba
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Bill wrote:
> boB Stepp wrote:
>>
>> This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
>> Tesla. The article is found at:
>>
>> https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
>>
>> Apparently he chose his articl
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 2:22 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
> This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
> Tesla. The article is found at:
> https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
>
> Apparently he chose his article title as "click bait".
On 2018-02-17 03:22, boB Stepp wrote:
This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
Tesla. The article is found at:
https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
Apparently he chose his article title as "click bait". Apparently he
does
boB Stepp writes:
> https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
> As I currently do not have the necessary technical knowledge to
> properly evaluate his claims, I thought I would ask those of you who
> do.
Thank you for asking. The author makes many mistakes.
boB Stepp wrote:
This article is written by Nathan Murthy, a staff software engineer at
Tesla. The article is found at:
https://medium.com/@natemurthy/all-the-things-i-hate-about-python-5c5ff5fda95e
Apparently he chose his article title as "click bait". Apparently he
does not really hate Pytho
101 - 155 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
