Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #45423
| Date | 2013-05-16 16:13 +0200 |
|---|---|
| From | Schneider <js@globe.de> |
| Organization | GLOBE Development GmbH |
| Subject | Re: Python for philosophers |
| References | <CAMbF=C_GF_AKO2dD_=bH6VN2GVcSbC=KtHFLw62CKq2yitcfyQ@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.1581.1368368230.3114.python-list@python.org> <avaqo7Fsj3pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1753.1368714014.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Maybe the implementation of the Python Interpreter could be seen as transition function. This can be understand in detail, but it even if you know how the interpreter works, you don't really know to work _with_ the interpreter. Even more, there are a lot of decisions, which are made 'by design' and don't have a clear answer. to see why somethings are done in the way they are done you have to understand the philosophy of programming with python. bg, Johannes On 13.05.2013 02:34, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Citizen Kant wrote: >> What I do here is to try to "understand". That's different from just >> knowing. Knowledge growth must be consequence of understanding's >> increasing. As the scope of my understanding increases, the more I >> look for increasing my knowledge. Never vice versa, because, knowing >> isn't like to be right, it's just knowing. > > It doesn't always work that way. With some facts plus a > theory, you can deduce more facts. But it's always possible > for there to be more facts that you can't deduce from what > you already know. > >> But take in account that with "shortening" I refer to "according to >> Python's axiomatic parameters". > > I think what you're trying to say is that it takes an > expression and reduces it to a canonical form, such as > a single number or single string. > > That's true as far as it goes, but it barely scratches > the surface of what the Python interpreter is capable > of doing. > > In the most general terms, the Python interpeter (or > any other computer system, for that matter) can be thought > of as something with an internal state, and a transition > function that takes the state together with some input > and produces another state together with some output: > > F(S1, I) --> (S2, O) > > (Computer scientists call this a "finite state machine", > because there is a limited number of possible internal > states -- the computer only has so much RAM, disk space, > etc.) > > This seems to be what you're trying to get at with your > game-of-chess analogy. > > What distinguishes one computer system from another is > the transition function. The transition function of the > Python interpreter is rather complicated, and it's > unlikely that you would be able to figure out all its > details just by poking in inputs and observing the > outputs. If you really want to understand it, you're > going to have to learn some facts, I'm sorry to say. :-) > -- GLOBE Development GmbH Königsberger Strasse 260 48157 MünsterGLOBE Development GmbH Königsberger Strasse 260 48157 Münster 0251/5205 390
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Python for philosophers Citizen Kant <citizenkant@gmail.com> - 2013-05-12 16:17 +0200
Re: Python for philosophers Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-05-12 14:30 +0000
Re: Python for philosophers alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2013-05-12 21:19 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-12 09:00 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-05-13 12:34 +1200
Re: Python for philosophers Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-05-13 02:41 +0000
Re: Python for philosophers rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 07:53 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-14 02:24 +1000
Re: Python for philosophers rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 11:14 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-14 04:22 +1000
Re: Python for philosophers 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-05-18 16:56 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-19 10:04 +1000
Re: Python for philosophers 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-05-18 19:30 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-05-18 22:46 -0600
Re: Python for philosophers Schneider <js@globe.de> - 2013-05-16 16:13 +0200
Re: Python for philosophers Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-05-13 03:25 +0000
Re: Python for philosophers Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-13 14:33 +0000
Re: Python for philosophers Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-05-13 07:13 +0000
Re: Python for philosophers alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 02:05 -0700
Re: Python for philosophers Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2013-05-13 13:52 +0000
csiph-web