Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.055 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.89; '*S*': 0.00; 'programmer': 0.03; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'machines.': 0.09; 'subject:skip:c 10': 0.09; 'sure,': 0.09; 'wrote': 0.14; 'scaled': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'subject:between': 0.16; 'subject:programming': 0.16; ':-)': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'memory': 0.22; "aren't": 0.24; 'recognize': 0.24; 'space.': 0.24; "haven't": 0.24; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'generally': 0.29; 'relative': 0.30; 'waste': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'getting': 0.31; 'url:wiki': 0.31; 'you?': 0.31; 'consumption': 0.31; 'subject:that': 0.31; 'though.': 0.31; 'know.': 0.32; 'run': 0.32; 'could': 0.34; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'combination': 0.36; 'curious': 0.36; 'i.e.': 0.36; 'done': 0.36; "didn't": 0.36; 'possible': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'application': 0.37; 'minimum': 0.38; 'problems': 0.38; 'somebody': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'that,': 0.38; 'anything': 0.39; '12,': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'either': 0.39; 'most': 0.60; 'hardware': 0.61; 'simply': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'such': 0.63; 'valuable': 0.63; 'more': 0.64; 'nobody': 0.68; 'tasks.': 0.68; 'power': 0.76; '2015': 0.84; 'subject: *': 0.84; 'toy': 0.84; 'subject:Good': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1ZDzzo9lXYj9v5OACLbLrwgAwe/PXgfzSyayWVd3B9s=; b=tggyddYEaKfBTdvob1rncmSiXcEoZnXSYIwttWNx13214MUObyC4bmJahYHwskZed4 EOhKPVeRzn/azgaYK+wsBz6UnOyeaI3KjpxDFu6ptFfFT1RlOpuGU2paXXDQqiCcvEhD oyUTV/6VexZWS7eFcgoNdfBPkmGNMAmXc0qILugW+fFFYZa6OaGLS+lBEsPI498BQvkw osCr+xItIKe0aUQfPeIFf/LpCEMf0CcB9sJ5i++g/LiDGGzzT4kgqv9hE6H11hWjQnrq bPjVze9kvcOjoTcEWDjDl9BW2lkr41/PetqlMPf5AQlnrtxC3JDEVFEBPaxHaScR1WHa f6NA== X-Received: by 10.50.225.35 with SMTP id rh3mr25278741igc.29.1431488853366; Tue, 12 May 2015 20:47:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20f6a95e-85d7-4b59-8b4d-3d2ae2626f2c@googlegroups.com> References: <02dba7aa-8466-4937-a8d8-82ffd03e5568@googlegroups.com> <87wq0gyvyr.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <55515f9d$0$12987$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <569169cf-d232-48c0-bd49-91090e9c0ddb@googlegroups.com> <1fdbee0a-b425-44ff-b706-b6b407358bf1@googlegroups.com> <87y4ktwi20.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <20f6a95e-85d7-4b59-8b4d-3d2ae2626f2c@googlegroups.com> From: Ian Kelly Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 21:46:52 -0600 Subject: Re: Instead of deciding between Python or Lisp for a programming intro course...What about an intro course that uses *BOTH*? Good idea? To: Python Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 22 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1431488855 news.xs4all.nl 2836 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:42710 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:90524 On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:11 PM, zipher wrote: > I know. That's because most people have fallen off the path (http://c2.c= om/cgi/wiki?OneTruePath). You wrote that, didn't you? I recognize that combination of delusional narcissism and curious obsession with Turing machines. > You haven't done it because either others have done it for you (NumPy) or= you simply aren't perfecting anything that needs to scale; i.e. you don't = really need to minimize memory or CPU consumption because you're working wi= th toy problems relative to the power of most hardware these days. There is such a thing as over-optimization. Given unlimited programmer time, sure, everything might be made to run using the minimum possible time and space. Nobody has unlimited time, though. The job of the programmer is to get the program to run "fast enough" for the needs of the application. Getting it to run faster than it needs to is generally a waste of the programmer's time that could be spent on more valuable tasks. Of course, I say this as somebody who works on a highly scaled user-facing application that will never be "fast enough". :-)