Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #2063
| From | bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support |
| Date | 2018-04-12 11:51 +0100 |
| Organization | virginmedia.com |
| Message-ID | <18-04-046@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <18-04-003@comp.compilers> <18-04-004@comp.compilers> <18-04-024@comp.compilers> <18-04-034@comp.compilers> <18-04-041@comp.compilers> |
On 12/04/2018 00:09, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > Am 10.04.2018 um 20:32 schrieb George Neuner: >> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:48:43 GMT, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at >> (Anton Ertl) wrote: > >> Smalltalk had/has single inheritence only, and it's dynamic dispatch >> mechanism is very different from that of C++. > > Isn't *multiple inheritance* one of the features that C++ proved > impractical? Which other languages support multiple inheritance? > > DoDi > [Lots of languages have multiple inheritance. Python is one of the > more popular these days. As you've seen, opinions vary about how > useful it is. -John] It's so useful that I have to go and look up what exactly it means (and then I'm not much the wiser). But I guess some people develop dependences on such features. If I question some exotic feature in the Python group, there will always be someone for whom it is indispensable. (Never mind that Python lacks what to me are fundamental features such as named constants, 'switch', records, enumerations, repeat-n-times loops, static local variables, pass-by-reference, or goto. Some of those can apparently be emulated - usually badly and cumbersomely - by making use of the advanced features.) The trouble is, if you dare to put forward such a point of view, someone is going to mention the 'blub paradox', just to put you in your place. -- bartc [Python certainly has a lot of theology. I believe that python users would say that your misssing features are implemented through simple idioms and aren't worth gunking up the languages, e.g. repeat N times is "for i in range(N):". But like I said, it's theology. -John]
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-03-12 16:17 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-03-13 03:02 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-03-19 11:04 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2018-03-19 12:50 -0700
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-03-20 16:16 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-03-23 10:44 +0000
Re: algorithm performance, was Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2018-03-23 18:47 +0000
Re: algorithm performance, was Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2018-03-24 14:06 +0000
Re: algorithm performance, was Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2018-03-25 07:02 +0000
Re: algorithm performance "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2018-03-27 01:22 +1100
Re: sorting performance, Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine w.clodius@icloud.com (William Clodius) - 2018-03-24 23:25 -0600
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2018-03-20 09:06 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-03-20 12:49 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-03-27 14:46 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2018-03-30 14:20 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-04-06 16:09 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2018-04-08 14:21 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-04-09 16:51 -0400
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2018-04-10 05:48 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-04-10 14:32 -0400
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2018-04-12 01:09 +0200
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-04-12 11:51 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-04-12 19:40 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-04-13 14:10 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60 "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2018-04-14 14:11 +1000
RE: language design after Algol 60 "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org> - 2018-04-16 12:56 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60 "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2018-04-17 19:08 +1000
Re: Language design after Algol 60 "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2018-04-18 14:58 +1000
Re: language design after Algol 60 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2018-04-18 16:12 -0700
Re: language design after Algol 60 Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2018-05-01 10:42 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60 "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2018-04-14 14:19 +1000
Re: language design after Algol 60 bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-04-14 20:43 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60 Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2018-04-15 00:04 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2018-04-12 14:05 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-04-12 20:51 -0400
Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-04-13 03:22 +0000
Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2018-04-13 10:22 +0200
Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-04-14 13:40 -0400
Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2018-04-15 00:12 +0200
Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2018-04-15 00:23 +0200
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2018-04-10 13:15 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2018-04-11 13:27 +0200
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2018-04-11 20:06 +0100
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-04-10 18:32 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-04-12 20:57 -0400
Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-04-13 03:28 +0000
Re: language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2018-05-05 13:50 +0200
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2018-03-20 15:27 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine w.clodius@icloud.com (William Clodius) - 2018-03-12 21:09 -0600
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kartik Agaram <ak@akkartik.com> - 2018-03-13 13:27 -0700
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-03-14 00:07 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kartik Agaram <ak@akkartik.com> - 2018-03-13 22:31 -0700
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-03-14 14:49 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Kaz Kylheku <157-073-9834@kylheku.com> - 2018-03-13 20:51 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2018-03-14 00:27 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2018-03-14 16:37 +0000
Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2018-03-14 15:16 +0000
csiph-web