Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #56759 > unrolled thread

Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java)

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-13 09:37 +1100
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-13 03:38 +0000
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-13 15:34 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-10-13 09:04 -0400
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-14 03:39 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) John Nagle <nagle@animats.com> - 2013-10-14 12:18 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 09:43 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 10:11 +1100
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-15 08:50 +0000
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 08:48 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-14 18:31 -0700
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-14 20:02 -0700
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 13:26 -0700
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-15 21:46 +0000
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 10:45 -0700
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 18:42 +0000
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.demon.co.uk> - 2013-10-15 23:01 +0100
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 21:45 -0700
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 10:57 -0700
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 11:25 -0700
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2013-10-16 13:49 -0500
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 07:40 +1100
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 17:13 -0700
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 11:28 +1100
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-10-16 20:47 -0400
                    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 18:30 -0700
                      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@ling.helsinki.fi> - 2013-10-17 11:20 +0300
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 17:53 -0700
                    Re: Python was designed Piet van Oostrum <piet@vanoostrum.org> - 2013-10-16 22:33 -0400
                    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-17 05:24 +0000
                    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-17 13:43 +0000
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 12:01 +1100
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-10-16 22:09 -0400
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-17 08:02 +0100
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 07:49 -0700
                    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-18 01:52 +0000
                      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 19:08 -0700
                        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 20:34 -0700
                        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-18 03:56 +0000
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 02:00 +1100
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-17 16:00 +0100
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-16 18:44 +0000
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 10:26 +1000
            Re: Python was designed Piet van Oostrum <piet@vanoostrum.org> - 2013-10-15 23:20 -0400
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 20:53 -0700
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 10:32 -0700
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-10-17 18:44 +0100
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 20:15 -0700
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-17 19:08 +0100
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 12:49 -0700
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-10-17 16:57 -0400
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-10-17 15:10 -0700
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 18:59 -0700
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-18 02:57 +0000
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-15 23:48 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-14 21:35 -0400
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-10-14 21:50 -0400
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-15 08:21 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 12:48 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-10-14 19:11 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 13:19 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-15 03:18 +0000
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 14:29 +1100
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-14 20:48 -0700
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-15 05:51 +0000
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-10-15 09:48 +0200
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 19:57 +1100
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-15 15:01 +0000
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 06:09 +1100
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-10-15 16:17 -0500
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-10-15 12:26 +0200
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2013-10-15 13:11 -0700
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-15 22:00 +0100
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2013-10-24 23:14 -0700
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-25 19:05 +0100
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-26 04:46 +0000
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-14 14:11 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-14 22:43 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 09:45 +1100
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-15 17:18 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-16 23:49 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 18:15 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 05:39 -0700
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 06:00 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-17 16:15 -0400
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-17 21:41 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-18 03:14 +0000
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 15:12 +1100
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-18 04:45 +0000
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 15:53 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-19 09:57 +0000
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-19 21:49 +1100
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 00:23 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2013-10-17 09:42 +0200
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 19:24 +1100
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-18 01:58 +0000
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Piet van Oostrum <piet@vanoostrum.org> - 2013-10-17 12:58 -0400
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 12:37 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-10-17 20:01 -0400
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 11:09 +1100
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 13:54 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 13:32 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-18 21:41 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 22:26 -0700
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-19 16:35 +1100
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-21 02:07 +0000
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-10-20 22:21 -0400
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-20 21:44 -0700
          Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 17:56 +1100
            Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-10-21 09:05 -0400
              Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Lele Gaifax <lele@metapensiero.it> - 2013-10-22 09:38 +0200
                Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-23 08:16 +0000
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-10-23 06:36 -0400
                    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-23 14:21 +0000
                  Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-10-24 00:31 +1300
                    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Lele Gaifax <lele@metapensiero.it> - 2013-10-23 17:56 +0200
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 13:56 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-20 23:44 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 18:01 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-21 08:27 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 18:31 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-21 08:39 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 18:43 +1100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-21 09:11 +0100
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-21 08:24 +0000
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Metallicow <metaliobovinus@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 01:39 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 01:43 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Metallicow <metaliobovinus@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 02:17 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 05:50 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-22 02:29 +0000
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2013-10-22 07:02 -0500
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Metallicow <metaliobovinus@gmail.com> - 2013-10-23 22:31 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 19:55 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 20:19 -0700
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 17:13 +1100
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 00:51 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-25 01:12 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-26 06:19 +0000
        Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 17:36 +1100
      Re: Python was designed Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-26 10:36 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-25 23:59 -0700
    Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 12:24 -0700
      Re: Python was designed (was Re: Multi-threading in Python vs Java) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-26 22:31 +0100

Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

#56965

On 17/10/2013 15:49, Mark Janssen wrote:
>>     Prior to that [the '70s] you have punch cards where there's no meaningful
>> definition of "parsing" because there are no tokens.
>>
>> I have no idea what you mean by this. [...]
>> You seem drawn to sweeping statements about the current state and history of
>> computer science, but then make claims like this about punched cards that
>> just make no sense.
>
> It's like this.  No matter how you cut it, you're going to get back to
> the computers where you load instructions with switches.  At that
> point, I'll be very much looking in anticipation to your binary-digit
> lexer.
>

Please dial 911, 999 or whatever and ask for an ambulance, it looks as 
if the last batch that you bought to smoke was heavily contaminated.

-- 
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
Most poems rhyme,
But this one doesn't.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56892

On 2013-10-16, Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Types on the other hand correspond to our classifications and so are
>>>> things in our minds.
>>>
>>> That is not how a C programmer views it.  They have explicit
>>> "typedef"s that make it a thing for the computer.
>>
>> Speaking as a C programmer, no.  We have explicit typedefs to create new
>> labels for existing types, to make the type-abstraction easier to relate to
>> the object-abstraction.
>
> Who uses "object abstraction" in C?  No one.

It's not that uncommon.  I've seen it done many times.

> That's why C++ was invented.

C++ was invented because people _were_ doing object abstraction in C
and wanted an easier way to do it.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I'm continually AMAZED
                                  at               at th'breathtaking effects
                              gmail.com            of WIND EROSION!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56914

On 17/10/2013 3:57 AM, Mark Janssen wrote:
> Who uses "object abstraction" in C?  No one.  That's why C++ was invented.

"Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he 
was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by 
examining his wives' mouths." -- Bertrand Russell

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56867 — Re: Python was designed

Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> writes:

> Yeah, well 40 years ago they didn't have parsers.   The purpose of
> having a field of computer science worthy of the name, is to advance
> the science not let this riff-raff dominate the practice.

Hah! 40 years ago I wrote a parser generator (similar to yacc, that I did not know) and used it to generate a parser for Algol 68.
-- 
Piet van Oostrum <piet@vanoostrum.org>
WWW: http://pietvanoostrum.com/
PGP key: [8DAE142BE17999C4]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56868

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
> > Objects in programming languages (or 'values' if one is more functional programming oriented) correspond to things in the world.
> 
> 
> One of the things you're saying there is that "values correspond to
> things in the world".  But you will not get agreement in computer
> science on that anymore than saying "numbers correspond to things in
> the world"

Ok… I better take back the '…or values' because that's a completely separate (at least separable) argument and one which I dont want to go into with you.

The original argument: There can be a type-system that everyone can 'settle upon.'

The new (and avoidable) one: Objects and values are equivalent/conflatable as alternate models for building systems -- and therefore OOP and FP.

The APL on the other (third?) hand is at one remove the type argument.
One remove because you are now to see it not from the vanilla programmer's perspective but from the the pov of the language implementer. Once you agree to that you would (hopefully!!) see some things:

When implementing a scanner/lexer characters are the indicators of the types we are interested in. In C, a '/' may be a divide indicator but also a comment-starter.  Dozens of other such 'type-confusions' in most languages. APL bites the bullet, enriches the character set and therefore simplifies:
⍝ starts a comment
÷ is divide
/ is the reduce (higher order) operator

Likewise
= is equal
← is assignment
Whether in academics or in professional software engineering, if you had a clue of the man-hours and therefore money wasted in programmers/students writing '=' instead of '==' in C code, you would appreciate the sense in these decisions.

And you think that APL is behind rather than ahead of the competition?

Ah well… the mercilessness of the Dunning-Kruger effect…

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56973

On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such terminology
> and not have these sloppy understandings everywhere.  You dig?

Heh Mark I am really sorry.  I think this is the third or fourth time that I say something to which you reply with such egregious rubbish -- parsing has something to do with card-punches?!?! Yeah like python has something to do with the purple shirt I am wearing -- that a dozen others jump at you with a resounding 'Cut the crap!'

Well speaking for myself, I know I speak more wisely sometimes and more stupidly at others and I would wish my penalizers to calibrate the punishment to the crime.

Likewise here. I certainly 'dig' your passion to clean up the 'sloppy understandings everywhere' and would only wish for you the sanity of more knowledge of the subject before you begin to hold forth.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56975

On 17/10/2013 18:32, rusi wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
>> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
>> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such
>> terminology and not have these sloppy understandings everywhere.
>> You dig?
>
> Heh Mark I am really sorry.  I think this is the third or fourth time
> that I say something to which you reply with such egregious rubbish
> -- parsing has something to do with card-punches?!?! Yeah like python
> has something to do with the purple shirt I am wearing -- that a
> dozen others jump at you with a resounding 'Cut the crap!'
>
> Well speaking for myself, I know I speak more wisely sometimes and
> more stupidly at others and I would wish my penalizers to calibrate
> the punishment to the crime.
>
> Likewise here. I certainly 'dig' your passion to clean up the 'sloppy
> understandings everywhere' and would only wish for you the sanity of
> more knowledge of the subject before you begin to hold forth.
>
I learned a new word yesterday: ultracrepidarian. :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57023

On Thursday, October 17, 2013 11:14:29 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote:
> On 17/10/2013 18:32, rusi wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
> >> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
> >> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such
> >> terminology and not have these sloppy understandings everywhere.
> >> You dig?
> >
> > Heh Mark I am really sorry.  I think this is the third or fourth time
> > that I say something to which you reply with such egregious rubbish
> > -- parsing has something to do with card-punches?!?! Yeah like python
> > has something to do with the purple shirt I am wearing -- that a
> > dozen others jump at you with a resounding 'Cut the crap!'
> >
> > Well speaking for myself, I know I speak more wisely sometimes and
> > more stupidly at others and I would wish my penalizers to calibrate
> > the punishment to the crime.
> >
> > Likewise here. I certainly 'dig' your passion to clean up the 'sloppy
> > understandings everywhere' and would only wish for you the sanity of
> > more knowledge of the subject before you begin to hold forth.
> >
> I learned a new word yesterday: ultracrepidarian. :-)

Hehe!
And if you had uttered 'ultracrepidarian' before yesterday you would have been
ultracrepidarian. After that not.
[With frank and free respect to the power of google and cut-n-paste]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56977

On 17/10/2013 18:32, rusi wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
>> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
>> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such terminology
>> and not have these sloppy understandings everywhere.  You dig?
>
> Heh Mark I am really sorry.  I think this is the third or fourth time that I say something to which you reply with such egregious rubbish -- parsing has something to do with card-punches?!?! Yeah like python has something to do with the purple shirt I am wearing -- that a dozen others jump at you with a resounding 'Cut the crap!'
>

Cut the crap, cut the bollocks more like.  I am of course using the term 
in the context described here 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_Pistols#Never_Mind_the_Bollocks

-- 
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
Most poems rhyme,
But this one doesn't.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56985

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:32 AM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
>> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
>> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such terminology
>> and not have these sloppy understandings everywhere.  You dig?
>
> Heh Mark I am really sorry.  I think this is the third or fourth time that I say something to which you reply with such egregious rubbish -- parsing has something to do with card-punches?!?! Yeah like python has something to do with the purple shirt I am wearing -- that a dozen others jump at you with a resounding 'Cut the crap!'

You feedback is respected.  However, you haven't included in your
analysis that you have a closed group here of Python aficionados.  I
invite you to take a look at
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TypeSystemCategoriesInImperativeLanguagesTwo
before you continue to issue insults.

> Likewise here. I certainly 'dig' your passion to clean up the 'sloppy understandings everywhere' and would only wish for you the sanity of more knowledge of the subject before you begin to hold forth.

Talk to me after you've finished your assignment.
-- 
MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56994

On 10/17/13 3:49 PM, Mark Janssen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:32 AM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
>>> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
>>> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such terminology
>>> and not have these sloppy understandings everywhere.  You dig?
>> Heh Mark I am really sorry.  I think this is the third or fourth time that I say something to which you reply with such egregious rubbish -- parsing has something to do with card-punches?!?! Yeah like python has something to do with the purple shirt I am wearing -- that a dozen others jump at you with a resounding 'Cut the crap!'
> You feedback is respected.  However, you haven't included in your
> analysis that you have a closed group here of Python aficionados.  I
> invite you to take a look at
> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TypeSystemCategoriesInImperativeLanguagesTwo
> before you continue to issue insults.

I'm interested to learn more about your ideas, but that wiki page is not 
going to help much.  It's a chaotic back-and-forth, with no attribution, 
so it's impossible to know who is saying what.  Except that it devolves 
into the same frustrated confusion, and then insults that this thread 
has, so I can tell: those trying to understand are frustrated, and Mark 
starts insulting people. "Hitler!": what does that mean??

Mark, if you want people to understand you, you have to get your facts 
straight, you have to explain yourself clearly, and when people don't 
understand, you have to not resort to insults.  Perhaps you are a 
misunderstood genius, I can't tell for sure.  So far it just looks like 
you are making sweeping over-generalizations based on insufficient 
understanding of the current and past complexities of the field.

Read and listen more.  Write and say less.

--Ned.
>> Likewise here. I certainly 'dig' your passion to clean up the 'sloppy understandings everywhere' and would only wish for you the sanity of more knowledge of the subject before you begin to hold forth.
> Talk to me after you've finished your assignment.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56997

On 10/17/2013 01:57 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>
> Read and listen more.  Write and say less.

Mark Janssen has no interest in learning.  From a thread long-ago:

Mark Janssen wrote:
> Ethan Furman wrote:
>> Mark Janssen wrote:
>>>
>>> Really?
>>>
>>> --> int="five"
>>> --> [int(i) for i in ["1","2","3"]]
>>>
>>> TypeError:  str is not callable
>>>
>>> Now how are you going to get the original int type back?
>>
>> Mark Janssen, you would increase your credibility if you actually *learned*
>> Python.
>
> Thank you, I actually knew it and was feigning ignorance for a good
> reason -- where is this magical "assignment stack" which remembers
> what int was originally bound to after I rebound it myself?

As you can see, if caught out he claims he was feigning ignorance, but then immediately shows the ignorance is real.

I take some solace in him not being a profane troll, as some in the past have been.

--
~Ethan~

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57013

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> On 10/17/2013 01:57 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>
>>
>> Read and listen more.  Write and say less.
>
>
> Mark Janssen has no interest in learning.  From a thread long-ago:
>
> Mark Janssen wrote:
>>
>> Ethan Furman wrote:
>>>
>>> Mark Janssen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Really?
>>>>
>>>> --> int="five"
>>>> --> [int(i) for i in ["1","2","3"]]
>>>>
>>>> TypeError:  str is not callable
>>>>
>>>> Now how are you going to get the original int type back?
>>>

Thank you for bringing this back up.  Was it you who suggested that
built-in are re-assignable?  Because this is a bad idea for the
reasons I just showed.  My error in that example was going into arcane
points that I should have cross-checked in the Python language
definition (that built-ins were or were *not* assignable), then I
wouldn't have had to have made my (otherwise valid) point, that there
is no magical "stack" which will remember your language re-assignment
so that you can get it back, but then the example should have never
been pushed into existence in the first place.

-- 
MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57019

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:59:07 -0700, Mark Janssen wrote:

>>>>> --> int="five"
>>>>> --> [int(i) for i in ["1","2","3"]]
>>>>>
>>>>> TypeError:  str is not callable
>>>>>
>>>>> Now how are you going to get the original int type back?


Trivially easy:

py> int
<type 'int'>
py> int = "five"  # Oops!
py> int(42.5)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
TypeError: 'str' object is not callable
py> del int
py> int(42.5)  # Phew!
42



> Thank you for bringing this back up.  Was it you who suggested that
> built-in are re-assignable?  


It's not just a suggestion, it is a fact. The built-ins are just a 
namespace, like any other module, class, or other namespace.

(Of course, if you break something in the built-ins, the consequences are 
likely to be significantly more wide-ranging, but that's another issue.)

However, in the code shown above, you don't actually reassign a built-in. 
You merely shadow it within the current module. Do you understand the 
difference? In the above, the *builtin* int still exists, but your code 
can no longer get direct access to it because a *global* int gets in the 
way. Using Python 2.7:

py> import __builtin__ as builtins
py> builtins.int
<type 'int'>
py> int = "five"
py> int
'five'
py> builtins.int
<type 'int'>

so deleting the global "int" simply reveals the otherwise hidden 
builtin.int instead.

However, if you rebind the builtin, Python doesn't remember what the old 
value was (although in principle it could):

py> del int  # get rid of the global
py> int is builtins.int
True
py> builtins.int = "six"  # oh oh, this could be bad
py> int
'six'
py> del int
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
NameError: name 'int' is not defined



In this case, deleting the builtin doesn't magically recover it, it just 
deletes it:

py> del builtins.int
py> int
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
NameError: name 'int' is not defined


At this point, in general, you've buggered up the current Python 
environment and would normally need to restart the interpreter. But in 
this specific case, all is not quite so lost: we can recover from this if 
only we can find another reference to the int built-in type, and restore 
it to the builtins:


py> builtins.int = type(42)
py> int("23")
23


I see no reason why Python couldn't create a read-only "backup builtins" 
namespace, but on the other hand, why bother?


> Because this is a bad idea for the reasons I just showed.

"Breaking things" is always a bad idea. But re-binding is not necessarily 
a bad thing. Let's say I want to find out how often the built-in "len" 
function is called by some module:


py> count = 0
py> def mylen(x):
...     global count
...     count += 1
...     return _len(x)
...
py> _len = len  # save the real len
py> builtins.len = mylen  # monkey-patch the builtins
py> import mymodule
py> count
3

Now obviously this is a trivial example. But there are more interesting, 
and useful, reasons for monkey-patching builtins, usually for testing and 
debugging purposes. Such a technique should be used with caution, but it 
can be used.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56865

On 15/10/2013 21:26, Mark Janssen wrote:
>
> Yeah, well 40 years ago they didn't have parsers.
>

I'm very pleased to see that (presumably) some Americans do have a sense 
of humour.

-- 
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
Most poems rhyme,
But this one doesn't.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56834

On 10/14/2013 7:11 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:

> I'm not sure what you mean by all of these - I've known Python for
> only a (relatively) short time, wasn't there in the 1.x days (much
> less the <1.0 days). But according to its history page, the early 1.x
> versions of Python predate the widespread adoption of Unicode, so it's
> a little unfair to look with 2013 eyes and say that full true Unicode
> support should have been there from the start.

The first versions of Python and unicode were developed and released 
about the same time. No one knew that either would be as successful as 
they have become over two decades.

>> Old-style classes vs. new-style classes.
>
> By the time I started using Python, new-style classes existed and were
> the recommended way to do things, so I never got the "feel" for
> old-style classes. I assume there was a simplicity to them, since

Too simple. All user classes were instances of the userclass type. All 
user instances were instances of the userinstance type, or something 
like that. There were otherwise separate from builtin types. I have 
forgotten the details and have no wish to remember.

The system was usable but klutzy. I believe it was an add-on after the 
initial release. People wanted to be able to subclass builtins even back 
in 1.4 days, but Guido did not realized how to use the obscure metaclass 
hook to do so until 2.2 was being developed. Most core devs are happy to 
be rid of them (except when patching 2.7).

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56836

In article <mailman.1087.1381800936.18130.python-list@python.org>,
 Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:

> The first versions of Python and unicode were developed and released 
> about the same time. No one knew that either would be as successful as 
> they have become over two decades.

Much the same can be said for IPv6 :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56845

On 15/10/2013 02:50, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <mailman.1087.1381800936.18130.python-list@python.org>,
>   Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
>
>> The first versions of Python and unicode were developed and released
>> about the same time. No one knew that either would be as successful as
>> they have become over two decades.
>
> Much the same can be said for IPv6 :-)
>

My encyclopedia doesn't mention Python, unicode or IPv6.  Not that it's 
old, but the stone mason retired years ago :)

-- 
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
Most poems rhyme,
But this one doesn't.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56835

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Mark Janssen
<dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Python objects have dynamic operations suited
>> to a naive interpreter like CPython.
>
> Naive, no.
>

"Naive", in this instance, means executing code exactly as written,
without optimizing things (and it's not an insult, btw). For instance,
a C compiler might turn this into simple register operations:

int x=5;

int foo()
{
    x+=3;
    return x*2;
}

The two references to 'x' inside foo() can safely be assumed to be the
same 'x', and the value as written by the += MUST be the one used to
calculate *2. If you declare x to be volatile, that assumption won't
be made, and the interpretation will be naive. Now here's the CPython
equivalent:

x=5
def foo():
    global x
    x+=3
    return x*2

>>> dis.dis(foo)
  3           0 LOAD_GLOBAL              0 (x)
              3 LOAD_CONST               1 (3)
              6 INPLACE_ADD
              7 STORE_GLOBAL             0 (x)

  4          10 LOAD_GLOBAL              0 (x)
             13 LOAD_CONST               2 (2)
             16 BINARY_MULTIPLY
             17 RETURN_VALUE

Note that the global is stored, then reloaded. This is the naive
approach, assuming nothing about the relations between operations.
It's an easy way to be thread-safe, it just costs performance.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56837

>>> Python objects have dynamic operations suited
>>> to a naive interpreter like CPython.
>>
>> Naive, no.
>
> "Naive", in this instance, means executing code exactly as written,
> without optimizing things (and it's not an insult, btw).

In that case, you're talking about a "non-optimizing" interpreter, but
then, that what is supposed to happen.  I don't think it's fair to
call it "naive".  An interpreter can't guess what you mean to do in
every circumstance (threading?).  It's better to do it right (i.e.
well-defined), *slowly* than to do it fast, incorrectly.

MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web