Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!not-for-mail From: Grant Edwards Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:42:32 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Lines: 35 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl.comtrol.com X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1381948952 15827 64.122.56.22 (16 Oct 2013 18:42:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:42:32 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Linux) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:56891 On 2013-10-16, Mark Janssen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: >> On 2013-10-15, Mark Janssen wrote: >> >>> Yeah, well 40 years ago they didn't have parsers. >> >> That seems an odd thing to say. People were assembling and compiling >> computer programs long before 1973. > > I'm using the word "parser" in the sense of a stand-alone application > that became useful with the growing open source culture that was > developing in the 70's. Prior to that you have punch cards where > there's no meaningful definition of "parsing" because there are no > tokens. What do you mean "there are no tokens?". Pascal/Fortran/COBOL on a deck of punched cards is parsed/compiled the same as it is in a file on a hard drive. > Would you say you were "parsing" on an old digital machine > where you input programs with binary switches? No, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about compiling Fortran or PL/1 or whatnot. > But after the advent of the dumb terminal, parsers started evolving, > and that was the early 70's. I might be a year or two off, but I only > gave one significant digit there. ;^) I don't understand what dumb terminals have to do with it. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I'm GLAD I at remembered to XEROX all gmail.com my UNDERSHIRTS!!